Guiding Theories and Research

In this literature review I provide a theoretical framework for establishing the importance of

using students native language in a beginner second language classroom. I also analyze

literature and findings from similar research studies and reflect on the connections they have

with my self-study action research project. Racialized discourse, a qualitative theoretical

perspective, is used to help to inform my research. It is defined as raising important questions

about the control and production of knowledge, particularly about people and communities of

color (Ladson-Billings, 2000). In the case of my self-study research, I would like to raise

important questions regarding current bilingual programs and institutions that favor English-only

curriculum. Immigrant groups are not receiving the same educational opportunities and support

in the classroom as their English-speaking peers.

In order to help address my question on native language use in the second language

classroom first I examine sociocultural theory as the theoretical framework, which informs my

research. Second, I provide a brief background on English-only curriculum. Third, I discuss

theories against native language use in instruction. Fourth, I explore different models of bilingual

education. Lastly, I consider the possible roles of students native language in the ESL classroom.

Examining Sociocultural Theory as a Theoretical Framework

The underlying theory that I would like to examine for my research is Vygotskys

sociocultural theory, which describes learning as a social process and views social interactions as

a fundamental role in the development of cognition (Vygotsky, 1978). For the purpose of my

research I would like to specifically examine some key aspects in sociocultural theory that relate

to my self-study, which are: the zone of proximal development (ZPD), negotiating meaning

through use of the native language, and students ability to communicate.

 The zone of proximal development. ZPD is the notion that a students potential for learning

and development is limited to a zone of proximal development. Furthermore, techniques such

as scaffolding, collaborative learning (pair or group work), and modeling of activities are

implemented into lessons to help students reach their next level of development. The next

level of development for beginner ESL students, whose instructor implements use of their

native language in the classroom, may be slowly reducing the amount of native language usage

until no longer needed.

In my self-study action research, I implement scaffolding and modeling techniques that

include the use of students native language. According to Jerome Bruner (1978), scaffolding

includes instructional techniques that monitor and adjust support as students progressively move

toward stronger understanding and independence in the language learning process. In my own

teaching practice, I utilize scaffolding through modeling or demonstrating how to complete a

task in both students native language and English. After scaffolding a task, I then take a step

back and allow students to try on their own, offering support as needed.

Mandrinan (2014) describes the scaffolding process in her research and concludes,

The mother tongue is most useful at beginning and low levels, where first language

can be used to introduce the major differences between the first and second language.

As students acquire more English, the use of the first language may be reduced, and

the use of visual aids and body language as well. It is important that beginning

learners of English are exposed to situations that require the use of the second

language to develop their acquisition (Mandrinan, 2014).

 By using students native language when scaffolding or modeling lessons and activities

students are better able to understand: content, the assigned task or activity, and form

connections with their existing knowledge to new learned knowledge.

Negotiating meaning through use of the native language.

According to Brooks and Donato (1994), learners especially beginners, often benefit

from using the first language when negotiating meaning. Some use of the first language

during second language interactions is a normal psycholinguistic process that facilitates

second-language production and allows the learners to both initiate and sustain verbal

interaction with one another (Brook and Donato, 1994).

Verbal interaction with one another is an essential key aspect to Vygotskys sociocultural

theory in which students are able to socialize and learn with their peers and instructor while

negotiating meaning.

With my beginner ESL students, I like to provide a Spanish explanation or translation and

then follow it up with the English translation and explanation. This has helped students to

understand word meaning during instruction as well as communicate their thoughts or questions.

Second language learners face the challenge of reconciling their developing word sense and

word meaning in English with the word sense of the equivalent word in their native language-

what that word evokes for them personally (Mahn & John-Steiner, p.56). Many of my students

when faced with a new word tend to write down the Spanish meaning next to it in order to help

them make connections and remember that particular word.

Students ability to communicate. Next, I would like to examine another key aspect to

Vygotskys sociocultural theory, students ability to communicate how they are feeling or what

they are thinking. For many second language learners being able to communicate their inner
thoughts and feelings in the target language can be troublesome. For this reason, sociocultural

theory suggests use of students native language to communicate feelings and thoughts they

could not express any other way.

Sociocultural theory (Vygotsky, 1978) can be characterized by its central claim that

childrens minds develop as a result of constant interactions with the social world-

that the world of people who do things with and for each other, who learn from each

other and use the experiences of previous generations to successfully meet the present

demands of life (Stetsenko & Arievitch, 2000).

In my personal experience teaching beginner ESL students there have been many occasions

in which the native language was used to convey thoughts, feelings, or ask questions. Through

translations these meaningful social interactions have been able to take place in the classroom.

Without the use of the native language these students would not have been able to communicate

with me or their peers, due to their little English proficiency. In these types of situations,

similarly to how children learn a language, the use of students native language can play an

important part in social interactions and relationships among students and the instructor in the

classroom.

Brief Background on English-only Curriculum

In the 1900s many states, including California, began to support of the idea of an English-

only curriculum and pushed for laws against bilingual programs and instruction in public

schools.

Research was conducted before and after these laws went into effect and found:

little difference in academic outcomes for students in the English-only programs over

their performance prior to the passage of the laws: the achievement gaps were not
 closing in any of the states that had passed the English-only legislation (Gandara &

Contreras, 2009).

This research reveals alarming data on both English-only and bilingual programs regarding

their effectiveness. As well as issues that need to be addressed in order to improve the academic

outcomes of ESL students.

Examining Theories Against Native Language Use in Instruction

Theories such as the direct method and natural approach provide frameworks against

bilingual instruction approaches. I have included these theories in my literature review because I

felt that it was important, when analyzing the role of the native language, to view both sides of

the spectrum and form my own perceptions of the information presented. In doing so, I was able

to understand the reasoning behind these views as well as find deficiencies in their literature.

The first theory I would like to examine is Berlitz (1900) direct method, which allows only

the target language to be utilized in the classroom by removing any use of the students native

language in the classroom. The direct method insists that second language learning should be

more like learning your first language, and includes much active oral interaction, spontaneous

use of the language, no translation between the first language and the second language, and little

or no analysis of grammatical rules (Brown, 2000), similarly to when children learn their first

language and have no other language to depend on.

When using this approach in the ESL classroom students are fully exposed to the target

language and allowed to construct their own meaning of the language creating meaningful

learning. The direct method enforces intense communicative practice skills, which is a major

component to learning a second language. The very important rule is that no interpretation is

allowed (Samani & Narafshan, 2016). This method typically involves teaching speaking first
then reading and writing. Speaking lessons are taught through demonstrations and pronunciation

practices. Reading is taught through dictation, reading aloud and conversation exersices where

students are encouraged to self-correct their mistakes. Writing lessons are taught through simple

paragraph writing exercies where the teacher decides the topics based on students level.

The direct method approach when applied to communicative practice, activities, or situations

does play an important role in second language acquisition. Therefore, it should not be ignored or

removed from the second language classroom and should be applied during communicative

practice situations in order to promote target language use. Under these situations I would

consider the use of students native language debilitating and not a benefit towards student

learning. Despite this, there are some drawbacks that I would like to discuss below.

In Liu & Zeng (2015), some of the disadvantages student participants mentioned

was that using the first language in the second language classroom can make students

rely on their first language thus getting less practice in the second language. Another

major disadvantage of using the first language mentioned by instructors was that it

could limit students exposure to authentic target language learning (Liu & Zeng,

2015).

The second theory that I would like to examine is the natural approach, which states that a

second language can be taught by using it naturally and actively through demonstration and

actions without the learners first language (Richards & Rodgers, 1986). This approach stems

from the notion that children learn language naturally, therefore anyone learning a second

language can apply the natural approach. Children are able to learn language through constant

demonstrations in natural contexts such as at home with family, at school with teachers, on the

playground, or in the classroom with peers etc. According to Krashen (1983), acquisition
requires meaningful interaction in the target language- natural communication- in which speakers

are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages they are conveying and

understanding (Krashen, 1983). Adults unfortunately may not have the same opportunities,

exposure, and guidance to learn the language through demonstration in a natural context,

therefore this approach may not be helpful in the adult ESL classroom. A notable difference

between the the direct method and the natural approach is that the natural approach does not

entirely remove use of the native language, but focuses on using the English language primarily.

The literature presented in favor of English-only instruction and curriculum, heavily stresses

the importance in maximum exposure of the target language in the SLA classroom. Krashen

(1983), states that unless it is compensated by further target-language talk, code-switching

reduces exposure to that all-important comprehensible input in the target language (Krashen,

1983). Code-switching is the use of two languages simultaneously or interchangeably (Samani &

Narafshan, 2016). While, I do not disagree with this notion nor am I disputing it in my self-study

action research, I am particularly concerned with the issue of entirely removing the students

native language from the classroom, more specifically from the beginner level class. I understand

that continuous use of students native language reduces the amount of target language input and

practice. However, in situations where the learner has little proficiency in the target language, the

sole use of the target language can present comprehension and communication issues. I have

heard personal accounts, from my beginner level students, who drop out or quit taking ESL

classes because they felt lost and confused during English-only instruction and felt they could

not keep up with the teacher or class. I would like to advocate the use of students native

language, in beginner level ESL classes, in hopes that fewer students drop out from classes due

to these reasons.
 Exploring Different Models of Bilingual Education

There are various types of bilingual education program models that successfully

incorporate use of the native language in their curriculum. These education models take on an

additive approach to language learning defined by Cummins (1984), in which the first language

continues to be developed and the first culture to be valued while the second language is added.

Education models such as these include: dual language programs, two-way bilingual education

models, two-way bilingual education immersion, maintenance bilingual education models,

transitional bilingual education programs, English as a Second Language (ESL) programs, and

structured immersion models.

While there are key differences in all of the models listed above the dual language

programs, two-way bilingual education model, two-way bilingual education immersion, and

maintenance bilingual education model typically include both native English language speakers

and English language learner students combined in one classroom. Both types of students are

immersed in each language and culture equally in order to promote fluency in the two languages.

Transitional bilingual education programs utilize the native language of students as they are

learning English, but does not focus on further developing students native language. ESL

programs as defined by the U.S. Department of Education implements techniques,

methodologies, and special curriculums designed to teach English language learners English

language skills. ESL instruction is usually in English with little use of native language. ESL

programs, if possible, place students in classrooms that correspond to their English literacy levels

of either beginner, intermediate, or advanced. Lastly, structured immersion models utilize

students native language for support and clarification only when needed. English is primarily
taught using visuals, gestures, and hands-on approaches in order to help students develop and

learn the language.

Considering the Possible Roles of Students Native Language in the ESL Classroom.

While researching literature that included the role of the first language in the second

language classroom, I was able to find an empirical study conducted by Liu & Zeng (2015) that

included the attitudes of students and teachers on native language use in the SLA classroom. This

research study provided me with detailed information on the personal experiences and

perspectives of teachers and adult students. I was able to gain crucial knowledge through the

student and teacher viewpoints on when native language use was most helpful to them through

the data collected in Liu & Zeng (2015) research study. In addition, I was able to examine the

methodology and deisgn of their research and utilize it as a guide to help inform some of my own

research questions and methodology. This research study has also helped me with the decsion to

include my own students opinions on how they felt about using their native language in the ESL

classroom and when they felt it was hepful and not helpful to their learning.

Results from Liu and Zeng (2015) focus group interviews show that student participants held

positive attitudes towards native language use in the second language classroom and believed

that using their native language was helpful for the SLA learning process (Liu & Zeng, 2015).

Their research findings indicated student participants believed instructors should not avoid using

their native language in class, especially at the beginning level.

Also included in Meyer (2008), findings show that

at the novice level, there is a natural tendency in which both second language

educators and learners will turn to the primary language for assistance for various
 purposes such as lowering the affective filters, providing scaffolding for novice

learners, and making the classroom a more comprehensible place (Meyer, 2008).

These results helped to provide some roles for the use of students native language that I have

applied in my self-study action research project.

Furthermore, I have examined research studies that include the use of code-switching in the

second language classroom. I previously mentioned that bilingual education refers to approaches

in the classroom that use the native languages of the English language learners (ELLs) for

instruction. In my self-study research study, I included code-switching as a bilingual teaching

approach, that can enhance student comprehension when teaching content such as grammar and

writing.

Samani & Narafshan (2016) was conducted on code-switching as a strategy in English

foreign language (EFL) classes. Their findings included students attitudes towards teachers who

use code-switching in instruction. This research study has provided me with additional roles or

functions that the native language can have in the classroom. Hymes (1962) includes five basic

functions of code-switching in the second language classroom: expressive, directive,

metalinguistic, poetic, and referential. These functions have heavily guided and influenced my

own research and the possible role of the students native language in the adult ESL classroom.

Each function listed contains specific occasions when the use of code-switching could be used.

The expressive function includes teachers using code-switching to express emotions and true

feelings. The directive function includes teachers using code-switching in a situation where they

want to direct someone or get listeners attention. The metalinguistic fucntion includes teachers

using code-switiching to define terms, paraphrase others words and for metaphors. The poetic

function includes teachers using code-switiching for jokes, poems, and stories. Lastly, the
referential function includes teachers using code-switching for terms that are not readily

available in other languages, terms that lack sematically appropriate words in other languages,

and terms with which the speakers are more familiar with in the native language than the second

language (Hymes, 1962).

The practice of code-switching is not just due to a lack of sufficient proficiency to

maintain a conversation in English; rather, it serves a number of pedagogic functions

such as explaining new words and grammatical rules, giving feedback, checking

comprehension, making comparisons between English and the primary language,

establishing good rapport between teachers and students, creating a friendly

classroom atmosphere and supporting group dynamics (Nguyen, Grainger, & Carey,

2016).

Both studies mentioned above have provided me with a foundational understanding of

pedagogic functions for the use of students native language in the second language classroom.

These research findings have also helped inform my personal teaching practices as a bilingual

educator. Not only have these studies presented preference for native language use from both

students and teachers, on bilingual instruction approaches, but they also provide data that

includes the attitudes and voices of the participants on their learning. Including the attitudes and

voices of participants on my research questions is an aspect that I have adopted from Samani &

Narafshan (2016) research design and included in my self-study action research.

In summary, through the examination of sociocultural theory I have been able to

implement three key aspects: the zone of proximal development, negotiating meaning through

the use of the native language, and students ability to communicate into my self-study action

research and teaching practice. By analyzing English-only curriculums and theories against
native language use in ESL instruction I was able to weigh the pros and cons of the direct

method and natural approach in the SLA classroom. I have found that they do benefit students

particularly during communicative practice in the target language. Lastly, while exploring

different models of bilingual education such as transitional bilingual education programs, ESL

programs, and structured immersion models I have been able to learn about an array of bilingual

education program models. In relation to my self-study action research these programs and

models best help to define the types of bilingual teaching approaches that I implemented in my

classroom and teaching practice. Since my study does not include native English speaking

students who are also learning Spanish the dual language, two-way bilingual education, two-way

bilingual education immersion, and maintenance bilingual education programs and models could

not be applicable to my research.