Age and Foreign Language Learning in School

A. Lambelet, R. Berthele

• Publisher: Palgrave Pivot
• Year: 2015
• Print ISBN: 9781137525895
• eBook ISBN: 9781137525901
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Adult Education

This book discusses the empirical studies on how biological age influences foreign language learning in school. It provides a succinct overview of a complex field for both experts and researchers interested in the teaching and learning of foreign languages.

1

Key Terms in Research on Early Foreign Language Learning

Abstract: In discussions on the relative benefits of earlier versus later foreign language teaching in school, key concepts such as rate of acquisition in contrast to ultimate attainment, or age effects on second language acquisition (i.e., in natural contexts) and on foreign language learning (i.e., in school) are often confused and/or misused, leading to misinterpretations of the empirical results. For instance, evidence on the age factor in unguided language learning (as occurs in the case of immigration) is often transposed onto guided learning (as done in classroom settings), despite the fact that these two situations are, by definition, very different in terms of input and underlying learning processes. In this chapter we define the key concepts and notions and discuss the empirical challenges of the various types of studies.

Keywords: foreign language learning; rate of acquisition; second language acquisition; ultimate attainment

Lambelet, Amelia and Raphael Berthele. Age and Foreign Language Learning in School. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. DOI: 10.1057/9781137525901.0007.

As discussed in the Introduction, if early foreign language instruction and its learning benefits are frequently the subject of debate, it is in part because of the fact that certain research findings are sometimes poorly understood and used inappropriately. For instance, evidence on the age factor in unguided language learning (e.g., in the case of immigration) is often transposed onto guided learning (in class), despite the fact that these two situations are, by definition, very different in terms of input and underlying learning processes.

Furthermore, the results of studies that endeavor to measure ultimate attainment (learning outcome) are often confused with the results of studies that measure the rate of acquisition. This complicates the debate in odd ways because, as we see later on, these two research perspectives yield conflicting conclusions regarding the effects of age.

These and other relevant distinctions are discussed in detail in the following sections in this chapter, followed by a concise explanation of the main methods of investigation used in the reference studies on the effects of age on language learning.

1.1Acquisition and learning in natural and academic contexts

The main focus of this book lies on studies that have explored the effects age has on learning foreign languages in a classroom environment (“guided learning”). Yet, whenever necessary, we also discuss the conclusions of reference studies in natural contexts (“unguided learning”). Our review employs the following terminology:

Second language(s): We use the term second language(s) to refer to languages acquired in natural contexts of immersion (i.e., in a region where the target language is spoken as a first language by a large majority of the population).

Foreign language(s): The term foreign language(s) is used to characterize languages learned outside the region where they are spoken (i.e., learned mainly in a classroom setting). Included in this category are languages taught within a CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) or school immersion paradigm.

We use the abbreviation L2 in cases where it is not necessary to differentiate between second and foreign language(s).

In the same vein, we follow Krashen (1981a) and differentiate between (second) language acquisition and (foreign) language learning according to the context (natural context vs. explicit instruction) in which the acquisition/learning occurs. In the event that the distinction between acquisition and learning is not pertinent, we use the term language development to encompass both processes.

As becomes evident in the following sections, the distinction between acquiring and learning second and foreign languages is meaningful within the scope of this volume, particularly because of the differences in the quantity of language input that language learners encounter in each situation and the processes that lead to implicit or explicit language learning.

Nevertheless, it is important that the distinction between learning foreign languages and acquiring second languages not be perceived as an absolute dichotomy. We therefore do not necessarily subscribe to the view held by some scholars in the field that language acquisition and language learning are two radically different mental processes. On the contrary, we hold that myriad hybrid or intermediate forms are involved that vary both in terms of quantity and quality of input and in terms of how learning processes are manifested.

In fact, in much the same way that an immigrant can be exposed to rich and diverse input by being in constant contact with the language of his or her new area of residence (through work, school, social life, and family environment) or, by contrast, can have very little exposure to the target language if there is less integration after immigrating, foreign language learning at school can be hindered by input that is very weak in terms of quantity and quality, or it can benefit from larger and high-quality input, such as in bilingual education or CLIL.

Following the same train of thought, explicit learning of languages must not be associated exclusively with a school environment and foreign language instruction. For example, we call to mind courses provided for immigrants in which learners can benefit simultaneously from varied input that facilitates the implicit acquisition of the target language and from explicit instruction of certain grammatical structures.

1.2Distinction between rate of acquisition and ultimate attainment

When interpreting the results of studies investigating the effects of age on L2 learning, another important distinction to keep in mind involves the actual research question guiding the study. It is crucial to distinguish between studies that measure the rate of acquisition and studies that measure ultimate attainment (also called eventual attainment), or the level of proficiency attained by an individual who is deemed to have achieved his or her highest level in the second or foreign language.

The distinction between rate of acquisition and ultimate attainment was first introduced by Krashen, Long, and Scarcella (1979) in order to explain the divergent results in different studies on the connection between age and second/foreign language development.

As the authors have explained in 1979, reference studies demonstrate that, with equal input, adults and older children progress more quickly through the initial stages of proficiency development in L2 than do younger children. However, younger children generally attain a higher level of proficiency in the long run:

In other words, adults and older children in general initially acquire the second language faster than young children (older-is-better for rate of acquisition), but child second language acquirers will usually be superior in terms of ultimate attainment (younger-is-better in the long run). (Krashen et al., 1979, p. 574)

Aside from these differing results, the distinction between rate of acquisition and ultimate attainment is significant because, as is shown in the next two subsections, the two types of studies have different methodological implications.

1.2.1 Ultimate attainment

To test how age affects foreign language learning in terms of ultimate attainment, researchers have used data from surveys, self-assessment, formal testing, and assessments of L2 learners’ skills by native speakers. The results have enabled comparison of the proficiency level (either self-assessed or assessed by others) attained by subjects who began learning the target language at different ages.

In this type of study, three main scenarios are used:

a.Comparison of the ultimate attainment of groups of subjects who began learning the target language at different ages.

b.Comparison of the ultimate attainment of subjects who began learning the target language at different ages, but who are not grouped by age at onset. In principle, the effects of age are analyzed as a continuous variable.

c.Comparison of the ultimate attainment of subjects who began learning the target language before/after the age defined by the author as the end of the critical period to native speakers in order to verify if a native-like level can be achieved. The concept of native-like skills is discussed further in 2.2.1.1.1.

One of the major challenges in studies that focus on ultimate attainment lies in defining the level at which proficiency can be deemed to be at its maximum. The question is after how many years in a region (for studies on learning in natural contexts) or after how many hours of instruction in the target language (for studies on learning in a classroom environment) the subjects can be considered to have attained their highest level of proficiency. This would represent the point at which the test results no longer merely reflect differences in rate of acquisition, but fundamentally different possible outcomes of language development. Unfortunately, there is no consensus on the time needed to reach such a hypothetical “ultimate” point in language development.

In natural contexts, time periods of five years (Snow, 1983, cited by Muñoz, 2006b) or ten years (DeKeyser, 2000) have been suggested. Compared to these estimates for natural contexts in which input is generally abundant, it is difficult to conduct studies on ultimate attainment in academic learning in which input is limited to several hours per week.

As a result, ultimate attainment studies generally focus on second language acquisition (SLA) and therefore may seem removed from this book’s focus on the school setting. However, as many of these SLA studies are still used in discussions on early foreign language learning in school, it would be inappropriate to leave them out.

Since, by definition, research focused on ultimate attainment uses study subjects who have spent many years learning the language, the second major challenge for these studies consists in controlling for the numerous variables other than age that could possibly affect attainment – for instance, the quality and quantity of input, the length of stay in the region where the target language is spoken, and individual experiences with the language.

The third and final point touches upon the very concept of ultimate attainment. From a psycholinguistic perspective, the idea of an ultimate level (or in other words, a fixed point of achievement after which development ceases) corresponds neither to real-life situations (cf. the theoretical model of Herdina & Jessner, 2002) nor to empirical results (cf. the results demonstrating continual lexical development until old age discussed in Ramscar et al., 2014, p. 9).

In studies on the so-called ultimate attainment in school settings, there have been many research projects investigating the proficiency attained by learners by a certain age (for instance, at the end of compulsory education), which we suggest could be called L2 attainment.¹ We discuss these studies in Chapter 3.

1.2.2 Rate of acquisition

Studies that measure the rate of acquisition in relation to age consist of testing specific linguistic elements after a certain amount of time spent in the area where L2 is spoken (studies in natural contexts) or after a certain number of hours of instruction (studies in academic contexts).

This type of study, as compared to studies that measure ultimate attainment, has the advantage of better control over the variables and external factors that could interfere positively or negatively with learning outcomes. These studies also make it possible to avoid the theoretical and methodological issues associated with the definition of ultimate attainment.

Although measuring the rate of acquisition allows us to skirt the pitfalls of researching the effects of age on ultimate attainment, other problems can still emerge, particularly with regard to the effects of age on test-taking (not to be confused with the effects of age on learning). The problem with studies that measure the rate of acquisition is that the different groups being compared generally use the number of hours of instruction as their defining criteria: the members of each of these groups thu...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Introduction
• 1  Key Terms in Research on Early Foreign Language Learning
• 2  Theories and Hypotheses on the Influence of Age on Language Development
• 3  Effects of the Age of Onset on Foreign Language Learning in School
• 4  Foreign Language Learning in School: Interactions between Age of Onset, Learner-Related and Curriculum-Related Factors
• Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Index