(Student’s Full Name)
Abstract
Nowadays, the role of English can be hardly overestimated. Being a truly global language, a pathway to greater opportunities and the window to broader knowledge and other cultures, English keeps widening the horizons of its possibilities and functions. At the same time, teaching English as a foreign language requires taking great responsibility and, therefore, it often appears as a truly challenging task. This research aims to consider the importance of teaching English as a second language and the implications that may arise during the learning process so as to define key tendencies and principles in English teaching. Taking into consideration both the relevance of and the difficulties in teaching English literacy, the main problem presented by the topic implies teaching English does not, at the moment, meet the desired needs and goals of the learners. The given essay, therefore, strives to propose an appropriate solution to such a complex issue.
The research will incorporate key findings and ideas from the article by Claude Goldenberg called “Teaching English Language Learners: What the Research Does—and Does Not—Say” which, as the author claims, helps to “provide guidelines based on our strongest research about effective practices for teaching English language literacy” (Goldenberg, 2008). Taking an in-depth look into the issue of foreign language education is a major objective of the Goldenberg’s study. Therefore, the article presents the data which estimates the current state of common teaching methods’ efficiency and the situation of English teaching in general, thereby raising a number of relevant questions and searching for the solutions to them. The fundamental aspects that need to be considered include the following: what is the best way to teach English language development, in what settings the bilingual reading instruction helps, and whether oral English development can be accelerated (Goldenberg, 2008). By introducing and presenting Goldenberg’s study, this research aims to analyze the author’s statements and advise certain instructional modifications for English learners.
Key words: English as a second language, education, language literacy, teaching methods, instruction.
It is thought that it is best that languages be taught at an early age. This is especially true if the language that is being taught is important in conducting business, diplomacy, and presenting cutting-edge research studies in the academic world. The forces of globalization has allowed the English language to be perceived as the language that the world primarily uses to conduct business, engage in diplomatic relations, and participate in the world of academia. Although it has been established that the English language, as the global language, and, therefore, needs to be taught to the children at an early age, one needs to be mindful of the various challenges that are posed when an educator is required to do this. It is a known fact that teaching English to “English learners,” especially if they are young, is not “an easy task” if these instructors have not received adequate training in teaching English learners (Goldenberg 12). Additionally, Lores argues that it is not sufficient to instructors (even those who have been adequately trained to do so) to teach English learners at an early age. An English young learners program should be “‘carefully planned, adequately supported and resourced, and closely monitored and evaluated’” in order to be effectively implemented (qtd in Lores 7). Furthermore, “[c]ulturally appropriate materials” must be used as well as “[c]ontinuity of curriculum between primary and secondary English” (qtd in Lores 7). Therefore, in order to ensure that students receive the most benefits from an English young learners program then the instructor and the administrators of such a program will be tasked with the responsibility to overcome the challenges that are posed at the time of implementation. Clearly, this is necessary if citizens outside of countries that communicate in English and take advantage of the numerous benefits that abound from being competent in communicating in the language. Therefore, it can be argued that the teaching the young learners is a complex issues, which must be aligned with the specifics of their development and, therefore, comes as a challenge when considering the fact that it is a matter of diverse discussions on teaching methodology that is dependent on both global and local factors.
An increasingly connected modern world demands that young learners, who do not speak English as their first language, learn how to be competent and effective communicators of English. Approximately “400 million” individuals worldwide have acquired English as a native language and use it regularly in the Inner Circle, up to 500 million in the Outer Circle use it as the official language in “‘education, government, literature and popular culture’” and up to one billion people in the Expanding Circle speak or study the language (qtd in Lores 3). As a result, children are beginning to learn English as a second at “younger and younger ages,” according to current trends (Lores 3). According to Shin and Crandall’s research, which covered 55 countries, more than 25 countries out of the ones surveyed have “introduced” mandatory English language courses by third grade (Lores 2).
It is important to note that teaching students English as a second language argued that when it comes to “second language acquisition,” younger is better (Uysal & Yavuz 20). There have been numerous research studies that “place supremacy of young learners” over “older learners in language proficiency” (Uysal & Yavuz 20). In fact, one research study asserts that “native-like proficiency” in “phonology” is almost difficult to attain after “6 years old” and “allied problems” in “morphology and syntax” emerge after the child reaches age 12 (Uysal & Yavuz 20). Consequently, based on the evidence provided by academic research, it can be said that there are “some periods sensitive to language acquisition in different skills” so as to ensure that a student reaches total “proficiency” (Uysal & Yavuz 21). This information forms the foundation of the “Critical Period Hypothesis,” which asserts that “children can learn a second language” because their brains are still able to use the “mechanisms that assisted first language acquisition” (Cameron 13). Furthermore, experts posit that it is best to introduce a child to a foreign language at an early age because she would have more time to learn the language compared the period when she is an adolescent. Experts argue that even though adolescents are “more efficient language learners,” younger learners have more time to learn the language (Lores 6). Time is an “important factor” in the language acquisition process because an early introduction to a foreign language will ensure that the student gets “‘more practice and experience’” that will help in her gaining competence in language and becoming fluent (Lores 6).
Nevertheless, it should be noted that early introduction to a foreign language is beneficial in acquiring “some language abilities but not all” (Uysal & Yavuz 21). Some of the language abilities that a student who has been exposed to a foreign language at an early age will gain include listening skills and “pronunciation” (Uysal & Yavuz 21). Therefore, it is little wonder that educators worldwide have supported the teaching of English as a second language to foreign students. Cameron argues that in cases where “native-like proficiency” in a “second-language proficiency,” then the student will benefit from an early introduction to a foreign language (14). On the other hand, if the goal to achieve “communicative ability” in the second language then it is unclear that an early introduction to the language will have an impact on the acquisition of the language (Cameron 14).
Besides the educators, the parents of young learners believe that English will be able to gain access to better opportunities and, therefore, have a better future as a result of learning English. When students learn English at a young age they are able to gain access to knowledge and obtaining better quality education. Lores contends that when students are taught English as a second language at an early age then these students have the opportunity to become “global citizens,” which will allow them to easily access knowledge through the internet and “international travel” (6). Furthermore, as mentioned previously, English is the language that is primarily used the world of academia. If a student is introduced to the language at a young age then it will definitely allow the student to have the opportunity to conduct research and do studies at the world’s leading academic and research institutions. Additionally, it should be noted that a person’s command of the English language will enable him to have better employment opportunities. This is the case because a person who has the ability to communicate in English, even as a English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) speaker, will open up better opportunities for employment for that person. Jennifer Jenkins explains that even an ELF speaker is able to communicate effectively with persons of “different linguacultural backgrounds,” who have English as their second language and are a part of the Expanding Circle of English speakers (Jenkins 200). The academic argues further that ELF speakers can even communicate with those from the Inner and Outer Circles if they make “adjustments” to their local “English variety” (Jenkins 201). Moreover, it has long been established that the “ever-increasing demand for English” as a result of “economic globalization” has led to “international governments” being pressured by “international economic forces,” which expect that they have an “English-speaking” labor force in place (Garton, Copland, & Burns 4).
While some challenges exist that on the global level, which instructors who teach English as a second language to young learners face, there are challenges that exist that are peculiar and specific to a particular country. There many challenges that educators in various countries face at the macro level. According to Garton, Copland, and Burns that, as mentioned previously, that government policies can be restrictive to the extent that the government can be seen maintaining “close central control over the implementation of policy,” as in the case of Oman and South Korea (5). However, there were some cases where the government offers “few or no guidelines” as it pertains to policy implementation, as in the case of Brazil (Garton, Copland, & Burns 5). On the other hand, there are governments that have required that English be taught to young learners but have used conflicting or confusing language when making demands of their English as a second language teachers in their country. For instance, Japan has suggested that an “‘introduction to foreign language and culture” be a part of an “international understanding, rather than teaching language per se’” (qtd in Garton, Copland, & Burns 5). Consequently, educators have a difficult time interpreting a policy with such confusing language. Therefore, when a country has an unclear policy as it relates to the teaching of English as a second language to young learners, it can lead to “educational inequality” (Garton, Copland, & Burns 5). Schools, which have the resources and the staff, will be able to interpret the policy as stating that schools should facilitate the teaching of English to non-native young learners. On the other hand, the poorer schools, which lack the resources and funding, will not have the luxury to interpret the policy as suggesting that they should be teaching non-native young learners of English; therefore, they would opt not to teach them.
Besides macro-level factors, there are micro-level factors that needed to be considered as it pertains to the challenges that teachers of non-native young learners of English face. Firstly, it has been acknowledged that educators in East Asian countries has “introduced some Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)” and “Task-Based Learning and Teaching (TBLT)” (Garton, Copland, & Burns 5). However, these teaching methodologies only work when in a setting the class sizes are small and “well-equipped” (Garton, Copland, & Burns 5). Furthermore, these teaching methodologies appear to work best in “western countries,” many of which have access to native English speakers (Garton, Copland, & Burns 5). It should be acknowledged that although the ideal is to be taught by a teacher, who is a Native English speaker (NES), as in Japan and Hong Kong, China, many students in East Asia may not have the resources to hire a NES and would have to settle with having a non-native English speaker (NNES) teach them. Understandably, this would be disappointing for parents living in Hong Kong, for instance, since they believe that a NES teacher is superior to a NNES teacher because of her “oral communicative abilities” (Butler 3). Therefore, it is because of these beliefs that NNES teachers lack “confidence in their English ability, particularly in their speaking and listening skills” (Garton, Copland, & Burns 6). Furthermore, Copland, Garton, and Burns note a “severe shortage of primary school teachers of English” (740). The researchers mention that governments have often made the mistake of making English a mandatory subject at the “primary” or elementary school level without “due consideration of who will teach it” (Copland, Garton, & Barton 739, 740). Consequently, this would lead to schools allowing teachers who are not sufficiently trained to teach young English learners.
Another area of challenge that teachers of young English learners face is inadequate access to appropriate teaching materials. Copland, Garton, and Barton point out that despite a few countries being prescribed set of books to choose from, as directed by their respective governments, many countries have problems with the “appropriate books” not being made available or “are not used in the classroom” (740). Additionally, countries, such as South Korea and Turkey, have the added burden of having “insufficient funding for the equipment and the facilities” necessary for learner-focused teaching (Copland, Garton, & Barton 740). It is true that technologies required to effectively teach English as a second language has only developed in recent years, it has been discovered that many teachers globally have not been given the “benefits” of these technologies (Copland, Garton, & Barton 741).
In order to solve the main challenges or difficulties being faced by teachers of young English learners, several measures need to be implemented in countries having difficulties with allowing young English learners acquiring the language. The “pre-service” and “in-service” training of young English learners needs to be considerably improved so as to compensate for the fact that many of these teachers, who have not begun their careers as ESL teachers (Garton, Copland, & Burns 16). Furthermore, teachers of young English learners need to further develop their communicative abilities so that they can have confidence in expressing themselves in the language. Moreover, an “expanded range of materials for teaching young learners” is necessary (Garton, Copland, & Burns 17). Finally, it is imperative that educational “policy developers” create curriculum that is informed by “current research and good practice in effective curriculum development for young learners in order to enhance the learning experience of children” (Garton, Copland, & Burns 17). It would be helpful that the curriculum developed will integrate elements of the young learners’ of English culture.
In conclusion, teaching English particularly to non-local speakers is not a simple undertaking. It is a long process which might be impacted by various issues. Be that as it may, the viable instructor is the person who comprehends what to instruct, how to instruct, and how to respond to any circumstance requiring instruction. To show English as an outside dialect, one needs first to consider his or her learners as social creatures on the grounds that every learner is a person, who is portrayed by an identity and by social attributes which may impact the way toward learning.
Works Cited
Butler, Yuko Goto. “How are nonnative-English-speaking teachers perceived by young learners?” Tesol Quarterly (2007): 731-755.
Cameron, Lynne. Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2001.
Copland, F., Garton, S., Burns, A. Challenges in Teaching English to Young Learners: Global
Perspectives and Local Realities. Tesol Quarterly, 48 (4), 2014, 738-762. Print.
Garton, Sue, et al. Investigating Global Practices in Teaching English to Young Learners. London, British Council, 2011.
Goldenberg, C. (2008) “Teaching English Language Learners: What the Research Does—and Does Not—Say”. American Educator, 8-44.
Jenkins, Jennifer. “English as a lingua franca: interpretations and attitudes.” World Englishes, vol. 28, no. 2, 1 June 2009, pp. 200–207. doi:10.1111/j.1467-971x.2009.01582.x.
Lores, C. Teaching English to Young Learners around the World: An Introduction. Boston,
MA: Cengage Learning, n.d., 1-22. Print.
Uysal, Nuriye Degirmenci, and Fatih Yavuz. “Teaching English to Very Young Learners.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 197, 7 Feb. 2015, pp. 19–22. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.042.
