A Report of Early Language Learning Research



[pic]

79 Sanford Street ( Fairfield, CT 06824 USA ( Tel (888) 327-5923 x 20 ( Fax (800) 409-9928

International: Tel: 203-259-6480 x 20; Fax: 203-255-9320; schools@early-

EARLY LANGUAGE LEARNING RESEARCH

WHITE PAPER REPORT

January 2008 Update

For information contact:

Lynn Jeffery, Director,

School and Library Programs

lynnj@early-

INTRODUCTION

Early Advantage, as a respected educational publisher of Foreign Language and ESL instructional programs, seeks and promotes the highest standards of educational research and information which we, in turn, provide to our colleagues and customers in schools, libraries and homes in the United States and abroad.

We monitor research developments in early language learning and share it with constituents as a co-advocate with teachers, administrators and parents who support early language learning and funding for early language curriculum and language teachers. In this report, as part of ongoing updates, we have collected and reviewed recent work of the most respected scientists and leaders in second language acquisition, as it pertains to our colleagues’ and our core beliefs. This White Paper summarizes our findings to be accessible to parents, teachers and school administrators who rely on us for high quality information, as well as for a professional linguistics audience.

As has long been held, there are many personal and practical advantages to learning a second language that go beyond the obvious benefit of being able to communicate in another

language. Research has shown that the earlier a child begins, the better a child can learn a second language and the more benefits he or she can reap from that knowledge – acquired through an immersive bilingual environment and also through regular but intermittent second language exposure in a school or home. Additionally, cutting-edge research being conducted around the globe has shown increased cognitive abilities with second language learning, once generally referred to as intelligence. This leads to many positive effects for the young person in his or her first language, including enhanced verbal skills and higher test scores, and to greater opportunities in higher education, career and career compensation.

The following are six foundation principles of the benefits of early language learning supported by recent research and recognized experts in the field.

I. Earlier is Better: Children Have a Unique Advantage in Learning a Foreign Language.

According to the United States National Institute of Health, a critical period is “a period of time during an organism’s development in which the brain is optimally capable of acquiring a specific ability, provided that appropriate environmental stimuli are present.”

They go on to state that “Humans as well as some animals are known to have a critical period during which language is acquired.” The critical period for first language learning (L1) is often defined by a subsequent decline in the level of proficiency ultimately achieved by the learner.

Linguistic proficiency has traditionally referred to native-like pronunciation. “For second language (L2) acquisition, the age of acquisition is of critical importance for native-like grammar and pronunciation” (Uylings 2006) following (e.g., DeKeyser and Larson-Hall, 2005; Flege, MacKay and Meador, 1999; Johnson & Newport, 1989, 1991). In recent years the term ‘linguistic proficiency’ has come to include morpho-syntactic (grammar) proficiency as well as semantic proficiency. (Uylings 2006, Johnstone 2002)

The idea that there is a limited optimum time period for acquiring a first or second language was dubbed the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) and has been a focal point for linguists and Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research for almost half a century (e.g. Penfield and Roberts 1959, Chiswick and Miller 2007).

Early formulations of the CPH rested entirely on biological factors. In particular, during childhood the brain undergoes tremendous growth. The number of synapses and amount of grey and white matter increases significantly. For example, the number and differentiation of synapses reaches a high point between ages 2 and 4 then decreases and reaches a steady state between the ages of 10 and 15. Stabilization of the chemical transmitters in the brain does not occur until puberty. (Uylings 2006) Studies of feral and abused children have proven that there is a biologically based critical period after which first language acquisition is impossible (Candland 1993, Newton 2004). Many researchers believe that there is also a biologically based critical or sensitive period for second language acquisition. While the precise mechanisms underlying brain activity are not yet known, these physical findings seem to indicate that children are in a learning phase which ends with the onset of puberty.

Beyond biological factors, the period from birth to puberty offers other advantages which are not as likely to be found at any other time of life. First, children are used to making mistakes and are not as likely to be embarrassed or deterred by errors as either adults or adolescents. Younger learners “are likely to be less 'language anxious' than many older learners and hence may be more able to absorb language rather than block it out” (Johnstone,

2002).

Second, children have more time for daily study and more cumulative time for

achieving proficiency. Overall, those who begin learning a language early have higher levels

of success than those who begin late. (Jia,1998).

Third, many cognitive abilities are known to decrease with age. “Some age-related changes in cognitive processes relevant to language learning are a decreased ability to learn paired-associates (Salthouse, 1992), more difficulty encoding new information (Craik and

Jennings, 1992; Park, Lautenschlager, Hedden, Davidson, Smith, & Smith, in press; Rabinowitz, Craik and Ackerman, 1982), and less accuracy in recalling detail as opposed to

gist (Hultsch and Dixon, 1990).” (Hakuta, Bialystock and Wiley 2003). Furthermore, factors

such as diminished working memory capacity, general cognitive slowing, and potential

attention deficits affect adults. “All these processes decline with age, and the decline is

documented across the lifespan.” (Hakuta, Bialystock and Wiley 2003).

Among SLA researchers and applied linguists, “the belief in some version of the CPH presently represents the majority opinion.” (Scoval, 2000) Furthermore, according to Dr. Richard Johnstone in a reference study for the Council of Europe, advising on foreign language policy in Europe, “There is little doubt that in society at large many people feel intuitively that young children possess some inherent advantage in learning languages, and so there is a widespread view that 'the younger = the better.'” (Johnstone, 2002) So, with regard to the CPH, common sense, government leaders, and scientists appear to agree. Alan Johnson, the former UK Secretary of State of Education and Skills during the national Languages Strategy review and Lord Dearing Report, who announced on March 12, 2007 that foreign language curriculum would be compulsory in primary grades, was quoted by the BBC as saying “the earlier you start learning a language the better … It is the best time to start learning a language because you do pick it up so much more easily.”

Although most researchers agree on some type of critical period, in recent years the CPH has come under some criticism. The questions that have been raised have to do mostly with the biological basis for the claims. Researchers such as Bialystock insist that a critical period hypothesis must entail the corollary that those past the period are completely unable to acquire language. Of course, with the proper motivation people of any age can learn to communicate in another language, but the research is fairly substantial that adults are unlikely to achieve native-like fluency. This is because “Studies of the phonetic units of language have shown that early in life, infants are capable of discerning differences among the phonetic units of all languages, including native and foreign language sounds.” (Kuhl, Tsao, and Liu 2003) If older learners are unable to really hear foreign language phonemes, then they are less likely to be able to produce those same sounds.

A slightly more compelling argument against the CPH comes in the domain of semantics. Research by Neville and Bavelier (1998) and Stowe and Sabourin (2005) has shown that adults do as well as children in acquiring new semantic or word level concepts. As mentioned above, there are several modalities to language proficiency. The lack of a clearly defined critical period in one of these modalities does not disprove the general hypothesis. And, to repeat, although no critical period for semantics has yet been identified, many researchers have concluded that (L2) child language learners are more likely to obtain native-like pronunciation than adult language learners (Mayberry and Lock, 2003, Flege, Mackay and Piske 2002).

Despite remaining questions, decades of research have shown that there are special advantages for early language learners. Although they are not proponents of the biologically based CPH, Hakuta, Bialystock and Wiley did conclude that “second-language proficiency does in fact decline with initial age of exposure” and that “the degree of success in second language acquisition steadily declines throughout the lifespan.” They interpret the steady decline as evidence against the strictest biological formulation of the CPH, but clearly it supports the idea that children have a unique advantage in learning languages, an advantage that dissipates with age.

II. Foreign Language Study Increases Cognitive Abilities, Including Intellectual and

Academic

The benefits of learning a foreign language extend beyond the ability to communicate in another language. Second Language Acquisition research has shown that “foreign language study in the early elementary years improves cognitive abilities, positively influences achievement in other disciplines, and results in higher achievement test scores in reading and math.” (Stewart 2005). Additionally, these elementary school language learners are “more creative and better problem solvers than students who do not study a second language” (Stewart 2005, Landry, 1974, Marcos, 2001a, Weatherford, 1986) Finally, Genesee and Cloud report that “multilingualism is a key step in understanding and appreciating differences.” For instance, it is well known to linguists that the relationship between names for the same object in different languages are arbitrary. For a child who realizes this, abstract thinking will be easier, and it will be possible to begin seeing how languages relate to each other. For example, once a child understands that the word for water can be “eau” in French, “acqua” in Italian, and “Wasser” in German, they may also be able to make the connection that English and German are more closely related in this case than English is to French or Italian.

Additionally, studies by Berguno and Bowler (2004) indicate that “knowledge of second language significantly improved young children’s understanding of both mental and non-mental representations.” Specifically, “the most important finding of our study was that the knowledge of a second language made a significant difference to children’s performances on both the appearance-reality and the false-belief-for-self tasks.” This study included both fluent bilinguals and students of a second language who had not yet achieved mastery of the target language.

For those who achieve full bilingualism, the evidence is even stronger. A decade of work by both Dr. Bialystock and Dr. Pettito has proven that “bilingual children can perform certain cognitive tasks more accurately than monolinguals.”, and that “Being bilingual can give you a cognitive edge.” Work by Milloy and Fisher in 2002 replicated the results of work by Hakuta in 1987, showing that there are positive correlations between bilingualism and non-verbal measures of cognitive ability in young children. Bilinguals also have improved brain function with respect to memory. In a 2003 study by Kormi-Nouri, Moniri and Nilsson, Positive effects of bilingualism were found on both episodic memory and semantic memory at all age levels.”

Because cognitive research is relatively new and relies on cutting-edge technology and/or large numbers of human participants, more studies have been done on full bilinguals than on children who study foreign language at home or in school. To some observers, the findings from these experiments may not translate to non-immersive environments.

However, there is a substantial amount of research showing the cognitive benefits for those who have knowledge but not mastery of a second language. (e.g. Stewart 2005, Landry 1974,

Marcos 2001, Weatherford 1986, Berguno and Bowler 2004). As for these other studies, while the full benefits may not come until fluency is achieved, certainly those benefits are built as the child acquires the language.

Another potentially negative issue often raised by parents and teachers who are themselves monolingual, is that children (and adults) who know a second language alternate between both languages in a single conversation, discourse, or utterance. Worried parents and educators may jump to the conclusion that their children are confused, suffering from some cognitive impairment. But this phenomenon, known as “code-switching” to linguists, is natural and not indicative of any problem on the part of the child. As Associate Professor of

Linguistics Carmen Fought explained for PBS, “Rather than being, as many people believe, a

‘broken’ way of speaking, used by people who don’t know either language well, a number of studies have shown that code-switching is more likely to be done by people who are highly fluent in both languages. Code-switching occurs in bilingual communities all over the world, and seems to be a way of exploiting linguistic resources that comes naturally to the human brain.”

III. Foreign Language Study Improves Verbal Skills in English Including an Increased Language Awareness and a Larger, Richer Vocabulary

“Children who study a foreign language tend to develop new perspectives and depth of understanding about the vocabulary and structure of their first language.” (Stewart 2005)

As some parents and educators have observed, learning a foreign language reinforces the

vocabulary and concepts already known in the first language.

“The more children learn about a foreign language, the more they understand about their own language,” says Nancy Rhodes, Director of Foreign Language Education at the Center for Applied Linguistics in Washington, DC.

According to The Bilingual Edge by Dr. King and Dr. Mackey, “one of the most common misconceptions about early language learning is that it will result in language delay.” Children begin speaking anywhere from 8 to 16 months, and, “There is no scientific evidence to show that hearing two, three, or more languages leads to delays or disorders in

language acquisition…On average, bilinguals and monolinguals enter the one-word and two-word stages, for instance, at around the same time.” (King and Mackey, 2007).

A second misconception is that instead of a larger vocabulary, brain space is taken up by the second language resulting in a smaller vocabulary. This issue may be raised by concerned parents who pay close attention to the second language and not necessarily the

first language. In fact, an “initially smaller vocabulary in each language at an early age is typically overcome by age four or five, so that by the time bilingual children go to school, their vocabularies in each language are equal to or greater than those of their monolingual peers. (And, of course, when you add both of their vocabularies together at that age, they are way beyond their monolingual peers!)” (King and Mackey 2007)

Due to these and other misconceptions about learning language, some parents are

hesitant to start a second language before children master their first. However, all of the

scientific evidence points to the opposite conclusion. Children have nothing to lose and

much to gain by learning a foreign language.

IV. Children Who Study a Foreign Language Have Higher Test Scores in English and Math than English-Only Children.

Beyond cognitive enhancement and general academic success, “research has shown

that foreign language study in the early elementary years … results in higher achievement

test scores in reading and math.” (Stewart 2005).

A classic and comprehensive study undertaken by Dr. Cooper in 1987 showed that

“the length of foreign language study” was a statistically significant variable in predicting SAT performance. Year after year, the College Board which administers the SAT, releases a statistical report called “College-Bound Seniors” giving information on SAT performance across the country. Based on the “College-

Bound Seniors” data, as recently as 2006, seniors with 4 or more years of language study averaged over 50 points higher in the Critical Reading section of the SAT than those who had only a half year or less. For the Mathematics section of the test, students with four or more years of foreign language averaged about 40 points higher than those with one half year or less of foreign language instruction. This trend has been steady for over a decade. The College Board Reports, for all years between 1987 and 2006 confirm Dr Cooper’s conclusion: “the more the better” when it comes to foreign language study. Research at the elementary school level shows the same trends. Dr. Saunders found that Iowa students with 30 minutes of language instruction 5 days a week scored significantly higher on the math portion of the ITBS (Iowa Test of Basic Skills) than students one year older who had received no language training. (Saunders 1998).

Similarly in Louisiana, a study of 13,200 third and fifth grade children revealed that children who take foreign language classes did better in the English section of the LBST (Louisiana Basic Skills Test) than those who had not studied a foreign language. In the United States, the No Child Left Behind Act considers foreign language to be a core curriculum area; however, it is not currently among the tests which determine a schools funding for the upcoming academic year. For this reason, some parents and teachers raise concerns that taking time away from other subjects for foreign language instruction could hurt the school’s overall ability to pass the federally mandated tests. However, studies proved that these fears were unfounded even before the legislation was passed. As found by Curtain and Pesola (1994), “the evidence was consistent: There was no sacrifice of basic skills when time was given to learning a new language.” Thus, study after study shows the benefit of foreign language study with respect to test performance.

V. Knowledge of Foreign Languages Provides Students Access to More Opportunities in Higher Education and Beyond

In today’s world of high-stakes tests and ever increasing competition for college admissions, children need every advantage they can get. One proven way to get ahead is through foreign language study. According to the National Association for College

Admission Counseling, almost all U.S. colleges and universities require some foreign language study for admission.

Additionally and indicatively, “The longer a student has studied foreign language, the more competitive his/her application will be.” states an admissions counselor at prestigious Colgate University. The most selective schools require well above the high school minimum of 2 years. As reported in The Guardian December 13, 2006, by James Meikle, “University College London has decided that a GCSE in a modern foreign language will be compulsory for admission to all of its courses from 2012.” Likewise, the most competitive American schools such as Yale, Princeton, University of California Berkeley, and Stanford recommend four years of foreign language study for admission. Even so, admissions counselors are always looking for students who go above and beyond the requirements and recommendations. Of course, students who study foreign languages are not doing so just for the admissions boost. Once a student has been accepted, there are many more benefits to a solid foreign language foundation and cultural appreciation:

- Study Abroad. Most colleges and universities have study abroad and exchange programs. They require knowledge of the target country’s language. For this reason most students who do study abroad do so in their junior or senior years after completing language requirements. Students entering college with the requisite knowledge can study abroad earlier. This leaves more time in the later years for additional study abroad opportunities, career boosting internships, or a host of other activities that impress future employers.

- Scholarships. Prestigious scholarships like the Fulbright Program require extensive language preparation. Additionally, thousands of smaller awards are given on the basis of foreign language knowledge or academic rigor including the study of foreign languages.

- Further Enrichment. Entering freshmen who have already completed their school’s minimum foreign language requirements have at least 4 additional course “openings” in their schedule. For those goal-oriented students who have been working hard to get into college, these openings can provide time to explore non-major courses, to participate in more extra-curricular activities, to finish a semester (and a few thousand dollars) early, or to get a job or internship for extra experience and money.

Beyond the less tangible benefits of better memory, problem-solving skills, cognitive abilities, and cultural understanding, the study of a foreign language leads to real results when it comes to higher education. Parents may feel that the time investment for learning a foreign language won’t pay off in the long run, but educators and admissions counselors disagree. There is a wealth of cumulative mental and emotional benefits to language study as well as actual dollars saved by graduating early or avoiding an extra year of study.

VI. Foreign Language Knowledge Leads to Better Employment Opportunities and Higher Salaries.

As future trends in globalization continue, applicants with knowledge of a foreign language are offered more job opportunities and higher salaries. According to David Way,

Director of Skills for the U.K.’s National Learning and Skills Council, “Language skills offer enhanced recruitment and career prospects for individuals. Those without language skills are likely to be at a disadvantage within a multilingual company.”

The U.K. is not alone in realizing the imminent need for a multilingual work force.

The European Commission’s Action Plan released in 2003 states that “Heads of State and

Government… recognized the need for EU and Member State action to improve language learning: they called for further action… in particular the teaching of at least two foreign languages to all from a very early age”.

In 2005, the United States Department of Defense published the Defense Language Transformation Road Map. This plan calls for the creation of ‘foundational language and cultural expertise in the officer, civilian, and enlisted ranks’, ‘a cadre of language specialists’, and language based advancement in military ranks. Business Experts at the Center for

Economic Development (CED) in the U.S. have gone even further, stating, “Knowledge of foreign languages and cultures is an economic necessity.”

The CED conducted a survey among the graduates of The Garvin School of

International Management, one of the premiere business schools in the U.S. Its research in 2004 found that “over 80 percent of the 2,500 graduates from 1970 to 2002 reported that foreign language skills gave them a competitive advantage in the workplace.” As these reports show, language expertise is not only for translators and language teachers. In every sector of the workforce, from all levels of socio-economic strata, professionals are repeatedly shown to benefit from the knowledge of a foreign language.

In fact, CILT, the National Centre for Languages in the U.K., proudly states in 2006 that ‘according to recruitment agencies, salary uplift for those using languages at work can be ‘anything from 8%-20%’.” A report released in February of 2007, ELAN, conducted by CILT and InterAct International on behalf of the European Commission, found “a clear link between languages and export success.” Additionally, “a significant amount of business is being lost to European enterprise as a result of lack of language skills.” They estimate that “11% of exporting European SMEs (945,000 companies) may be losing business because of identified communication barriers.”

Finally, while it is possible to give statistics for the benefits of language knowledge in a wide variety of industries, there is no research available anywhere which states that knowing a second (or third) language is a detriment to employment. Based on government reports from the EU, UK and USA, there is a clear need for language skills in today’s global economy. These language skills benefit the employer in increased sales and company productivity, and they also benefit the employee through higher pay and increased opportunities within the international company.

Conclusion:

Based on the current and respected research on SLA reviewed above, there is a strong substantiated case for the six propositions given. As current legislation in both the UK and the U.S. suggests, there are many benefits to learning a second language for any individual.

Furthermore, learning a second language as a young child gives more opportunity to reap these benefits.

Bibliography by Point

I.

Bialystok, E. & Hakuta, K. “Confounded age; linguistic and cognitive factors in age differences for second language acquisition.” Second-language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum, 1999. pp.1-22.

Chriswick, Barry R. & Paul W. Miller. “The Critical Period Hypothesis for Language

Learning: What the 2000 US Census Says.” IZA Discussion Paper Series. (IZA DP No. 2575.) Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor, 2007.

Curtain H. “Time as a factor in early start programmes.” Research into teaching English to young learners. Pécs: University of Pécs Press, 2000. pp. 87-120.

Craik, F.I.M., & Jennings, J.M. “Human Memory.” The Handbook of Aging and Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992. pp. 51-110.

DeKeyser, R., and Larson-Hall, J. “What Does the Critical Period Really

Mean?” Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2005. pp. 89–108.

Flege, J. E., MacKay, I. R., and Meador, D. “Native Italian Speakers’ Perception and Production of English Vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol.

106. Melville: Acoustical Society of America, 1999. pp. 2973–2987.

Hakuta, Kenji, Bialystok, Ellen and Wiley, Edward, “Critical Evidence: A Test of the Critical Period Hypothesis for Second-Language Acquisition.” Psychological Science. Malden, Ames, Oxford [etc.]: Blackwell Publishing Vol. 14, No.1, 2003. pp. 31-38.

Han, Zhao Hong, Singleton, David. Eds. Fossilization in Adult Second Language Acquisition. Multilingual Matters Ltd., 2004. “How Your Brain Understands What Your Ear Hears.” (NIH Curriculum Supplement Series, Grades 7-8). Colorado Springs: BSCS, 2003.



Hultsch, D. F., and Dixon, R. A. Learning and memory in aging. Handbook of the

Psychology of Aging (3rd ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1990. pp. 259- 274.

Johnson, J. S., and Newport, E. L. “Critical Period Effects in Second Language

Learning: the influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language.” Cognitive Psychology, Vol. 21. Toronto, Atlanta [etc.]: Elsevier, 1989. pp. 60–99.

Johnson, J. S., and Newport, E. L. “Critical Period Effects on Universal Properties of

Language: the status of subjacency in the acquisition of a second language.” Cognition, Vol. 39. Toronto, Atlanta [etc.]: Elsevier, 1991. pp. 215–258.

Johnstone, Richard. “Addressing ‘The Age Factor’: Some Implications for Language Policy.” Guide for the development of Language Education Policies in Europe From Linguistic Diversity to Plurilingual Education: Reference Study,

Stirling:University of Stirling. 2002.

Marinova-Todd S. F., Marshall D. B. and Snow C. “Three Misconceptions about Age and L2 Learning.” TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 34:1. New York: Baruch College at the City University of New York, 2000. pp. 9-31. Neville, H. J., and Bavelier, D. Neural Organization and Plasticity of Language. Current Opinions in Neurobiology, Vol. 8. Toronto, Atlanta [etc.]: Elsevier, 1998. pp. 485–496.

O’Connor, Thomas. “Early experiences and psychological development: Conceptual questions, empirical illustrations, and implications for intervention.” Development and Psychopathology, Vol. 15. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 2003. pp. 671 – 690.

Park, D.C., Lautenschlager, G., Hedden, T., Davidson, N., Smith, A.D., and

Smith, P.K. “Models of Visuospatial and Verbal Memory across

the Adult Lifespan.” Psychology and Aging. [not in press]

Penfield W. & Roberts J., Speech and Brain Mechanisms. Princeton, NJ.: Princeton

University Press, 1959.

Rabinowitz, J.C., Craik, F.I.M. and Ackerman, B. P. “A Processing Resource Account of Age Differences in Recall.” Canadian Journal of Psychology Vol. 36.Ottowa: Canadian Psychological Association, 1982. pp. 325-344.

Salthouse, T.A. Mechanisms of age-cognition relations in adulthood. Hillsdale,

NJ: Erlbaum, 1992.

Scoval, Thomas. “A Critical Review of the Critical Period Research.” Annual Review of

Applied Linguistics, Vol. 20, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. pp. 213–223.

Stowe, L. A., & Sabourin, L. “Imaging the Processing of a Second Language: Effects of

Maturation and Proficiency on the Neural Processes Involved.” International 12 Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, Vol.43. Berlin: De Kruyper Verlag GmbH & Co., 2005. pp. 329–353.

Uylings, H.B.M. “Development of the Human Cortex and the Concept of ‘Critical’ or ‘Sensitive’ Periods.” The cognitive neuroscience of second language acquisition.

Oxford: Blackwell, 2006.

II.

Berguno, G., and Bowler, D. M. “Communicative Interactions, Knowledge of a Second Language, and Theory of Mind in Young Children.” Journal of Genetic

Psychology, Vol. 165:3. Washington, D.C.: Heldref Publications, 2004. pp.

293–309.

Fought, Carmen. “Do You Speak American? What Speech Do You Like Best?”

New York: MacNeil/Lehrer Productions, 2005.

Genesee, F., and N. Cloud. “Multilingualism is Basic.” Educational Leadership, Vol. 55. [s.l.], 1998. pp. 62-65.

Hakuta, K. “Degree of Bilingualism and Cognitive Ability in Mainland Puerto Rican Children.” Child Development, Vol. 58:5. Madison: Blackwell Publishing, 1987.

pp. 1372–1388.

Kormi-Nouri, R., Moniri, S., and Nilsson, L. “Episodic and Semantic Memory in Bilingual and Monolingual Children. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, Vol. 44:1. Bergen: University of Bergen, 2003. pp. 47-54. [from PsycINFO database.]

Landry, R. G. “A Comparison of Second Language Learners and Monolinguals on Divergent Thinking Tasks at the Elementary School Level.” Modern Language Journal Vol., 58:1/2. Madison: Blackwell Publishing, 1974. pp. 10–15.

Marcos, K. M. “Second Language Learning: everyone can benefit.” The ERIC Review,

Vol. 6:1. Washington, D.C.: Educational Policy Institute, 2001: langlern.html.

Marcos, K. “Why, How, and When Should my Child Learn a Second Language.” ERIC

Elementary and Early Childhood Education Clearinghouse. Washington, D.C.: Educational Policy Institute, 2001. .

Milloy, M., and Fischer, L. “To Learn a Language.” NEA Today, Vol. 21:1. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 2002. p. 22.

Stewart, Janice Hostler. “Foreign Language Study in Elementary Schools: Benefits and Implications for Achievement in Reading and Math.” Early Childhood Education

Journal, Vol. 33:1. Dordrecht, New York, Cambridge: Springer, Inc., 2005.13

Weatherford, H. J. “Personal Benefits of Foreign Language Study.” Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics No. ED276305), 1986.

III.

King, Kendall, and Mackey, Alison. The Bilingual Edge: why, when and how to teach your child a second language. New York: Collins, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers, 2007.

Stewart, Janice Hostler. “Foreign Language Study in Elementary Schools: Benefits and Implications for Achievement in Reading and Math.” Early Childhood Education

Journal, Vol. 33:1. Dordrecht, New York, Cambridge: Springer, Inc., 2005.

Vuko, Evelyn Porreca. “How to Bolster Budding Language Skills.” Teacher Says. New

York: Penguin Group, 2004.

IV.

“College Bound Seniors: 2006 National Report.” New York: College Board, Inc., 2006.



Cooper, T. C.. “Foreign Language Study and SAT-Verbal Scores.” Modern Language

Journal, Vol. 71:4. Madison: Blackwell Publishing ,1987. pp. 381–387.

Curtain, H. and C. A. B. Pesola. Languages and Children: Making the Match:

Foreign Language Instruction for An Early Start Grades K-8. New York: Longman, 1994.

Dumas, L. S. “Learning a Second Language: Exposing Your Child to a New World of Words Boosts Her Brainpower, Vocabulary, and Self-Esteem.” Child [s.l.], 1999. pp. 72, 74, 76-77.

Saunders, C. M. “The Effect of the Study of a Foreign Language in the Elementary School on Scores on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills and an Analysis of Student participant Attitudes and Abilities.” Athens: University of Georgia, 1998.

Stewart, Janice Hostler. “Foreign Language Study in Elementary Schools: Benefits and Implications for Achievement in Reading and Math.” Early Childhood Education

Journal, Vol. 33:1. Dordrecht, New York, Cambridge: Springer, Inc., 2005.V.14

Hawkins, David, A., and Clinedinst, Melissa. State of College Admission 2006.

Alexandria: National Association for College Admission Counseling, 2006.

Meikle, James. “University Students Face Language Requirements.” EducationGuardian.co.uk. London: Guardian News and Media Limited, 13 Dec. 2006.

.

Snyder, T.D., Dillow, S.A., and Hoffman, C.M. Digest of Education Statistics 2006

(NCES 2007-017), Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, 2007.

V

Hawkins, David, A., and Clinedinst, Melissa. State of College Admission 2006. Alexandria:  National Association for College Admission Counseling, 2006.

Meikle, James. “University Students Face Language Requirements.” EducationGuardian.co.uk. London: Guardian News and Media Limited, 13 Dec. 2006. .

Snyder, T.D., Dillow, S.A., and Hoffman, C.M. Digest of Education Statistics 2006 (NCES 2007-017), Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office,

National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, 2007.

VI.

B. Bloch. “Career Enhancement through Foreign Language Skills.” International

Journal of Career Management, Vol. 7:6. Nagareyama City, Boston, [etc.]: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 1995 , pp. 15-26(12).

“Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economical and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.

Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity: an Action Plan, 2004-

2006.” Brussels: Commission of the European Communities, 2003.



Cutter, W. Bowman, Hills, Roderick M., and Kolb, Charles E.M., eds. “Business Leadership in Public Policy.” New York: Committee for Economic Development, 2006.

“Defense Language Transformation Road Map.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Defense, 2005.

"ELAN: effects on the European economy of shortages of foreign language skills in enterprise." London; Newcastle: CILT, the National Centre for Languages; InterAct International; 2007.

“Language Announcement may not be Enough to Reverse Decline.” British Chambers of Commerce Online, Ed. Jo Tanner. 2005.

"Mixing It Up: combining a language with your chosen university course." Languages, Work. London: CILT, the National Centre for Languages; Department of Language and Skills, 2006.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download