The impact of out-of-school L2 input and interaction on adolescent classroom immersion and community-L2 learners’ L2 vocabulary: opportunities for interaction are key
Abstract
Comparing young second-language (L2) learners in different learning contexts is a valuable, but under-researched, design for determining how L2 experiences impact L2 development. This study addressed this gap by comparing the out-of-school L2 experiences of adolescents (N = 64) learning L2-English as either a community majority language or as a foreign language in an immersion classroom, and examining how differences in L2 experience impacted English receptive vocabulary ability. Participant questionnaires yielded information on sources of L2 input and L2 interaction out-of-school. Results showed the groups were comparable for L2 input, but immersion learners experienced less interactional L2 use and also had significantly smaller L2 vocabularies. Out-of-school L2 experience explained more variance in receptive vocabulary for community-L2 participants, with more significant predictor variables than immersion-L2 participants. L2 interaction variables explained more variance than L2 input variables for both groups, indicating that, overall, interaction is a key source of L2 receptive vocabulary development.
References
Adlof, Suzanne M. & Charles A. Perfetti. 2013. Individual differences in word learning and reading ability. In C. Addison Stone, Elaine R. Silliman, Barbara J. Ehren & Geraldine P. Wallach (eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders, second edition, 246–264. New York, NY: Guilford.Suche in Google Scholar
Allen, Patrick, Merrill Swain, Birgit Harley & Jim Cummins. 1990. Aspects of classroom treatment: Toward a more comprehensive view of second language education. In Birgit Harley, Patrick Allen, Jim Cummins & Merrill Swain (eds.), The development of second language proficiency, 57–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524568.007Suche in Google Scholar
Behney, Jennifer & Susan Gass. 2021. Interaction, 1st edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108870627Suche in Google Scholar
Blom, Elma, Tessel Boerma, Evelyn Bosma, Leonie Cornips, Kirsten van den Heuij & Mona Timmermeister. 2020. Cross-language distance influences receptive vocabulary outcomes of bilingual children. First Language 40(2). 151–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723719892794.Suche in Google Scholar
Carhill, Avary, Carola Suárez-Orozco & Mariela Páez. 2008. Explaining English language proficiency among adolescent immigrant students. American Educational Research Journal 45(4). 1155–1179. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208321443.Suche in Google Scholar
Chondrogianni, Vicky. 2018. Child L2 acquisition. In David Miller, Fatih Bayram, Jason Rothman & Ludovica Serratrice (eds.), Bilingual cognition and language: The state of the science across its subfields, 103–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sibil.54.06choSuche in Google Scholar
Cobo-Lewis, Alan B., Barbara Z. Pearson, Rebecca E. Eilers & Vivian C. Umbel. 2002. Effects of bilingualism and bilingual education on oral and written English skills: A multifactor study of standardized test outcomes. In D. Kimbrough Oller & Rebecca E. Eilers (eds.), Language and literacy in bilingual children, 64–97. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853595721-005Suche in Google Scholar
Collins, Molly F. 2010. ELL preschoolers’ English vocabulary acquisition from storybook reading. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 25(1). 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.07.009.Suche in Google Scholar
Copas, John B. 1997. Using regression models for prediction: Shrinkage and regression to the mean. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 6(2). 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029700600206.Suche in Google Scholar
Cummins, Jim. 2009. Bilingual and immersion programs. In Michael H. Long & Catherine J. Doughty (eds.), The handbook of language teaching, 161–181. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.10.1002/9781444315783.ch10Suche in Google Scholar
Davison, Anthony C. & David V. Hinkley. 1997. Bootstrap methods and their applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at: http://statwww.epfl.ch/davison/BMA/.10.1017/CBO9780511802843Suche in Google Scholar
De Wilde, Vanessa, Marc Brysbaert & June Eyckmans. 2020. Learning English through out-of-school exposure. Which levels of language proficiency are attained and which types of input are important? Bilingualism: Language & Cognition 23(1). 171–185. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918001062.Suche in Google Scholar
de Winter, Joost C. F. & Dimitra Dodou. 2010. Five-point Likert items: t-test versus Mann–Whitney–Wilcoxon (addendum added October 2012). Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 15(1). 1–16. https://doi.org/10.7275/BJ1P-TS64.Suche in Google Scholar
DeKeyser, Robert. 2012. Age effects in second language learning. In Susan M. Gass & Alison Mackey (eds.), Routledge handbook of second language acquisition, 442–460. Abingdon: Routledge.10.4324/9780203808184-38Suche in Google Scholar
Derrick, Ben & Paul White. 2017. Comparing two samples from an individual Likert question. International Journal of Mathematics & Statistics 18(3). 1–13.Suche in Google Scholar
Dunn, Lloyd M. & Douglas M. Dunn. 2007. Peabody picture vocabulary test, 4th edn. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.10.1037/t15144-000Suche in Google Scholar
Farnia, Fataneh & Esther Geva. 2011. Cognitive correlates of vocabulary growth in English language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics 32(4). 711–738. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716411000038.Suche in Google Scholar
Forgays, Deborah Kirby, Ira Hyman & Jessie Schreiber. 2014. Texting everywhere for everything: Gender and age differences in cell phone etiquette and use. Computers in Human Behavior 31. 314–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.053.Suche in Google Scholar
Gass, Susan M. and Alison Mackey. 2020. Input, interaction, and output in L2 acquisition. In Bill VanPatten, Gregory D. Keating and Stefanie Wulff (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition, 3rd edn., 192–222. New York, NY: Routledge, 2020. Series: Second language acquisition research: Routledge.10.4324/9780429503986-9Suche in Google Scholar
Genesee, Fred. 2006. What do we know about bilingual education for majority-language students? In Tej K. Bhatia & William C. Ritchie (eds.), The handbook of bilingualism, 547–576. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.10.1002/9780470756997.ch21Suche in Google Scholar
Genesee, Fred. 2015. Myths about early childhood bilingualism. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne 56(1). 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038599.Suche in Google Scholar
Golberg, Heather, Johanne Paradis & Martha Crago. 2008. Lexical acquisition over time in minority first language children learning English as a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics 29. 41–65. https://doi.org/10.1017/s014271640808003x.Suche in Google Scholar
Goo, Jaemyung. 2019. Interaction in L2 learning. In John W. Schwieter & Alessandro Benati (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of language learning, 1st edn., 233–257. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108333603.011Suche in Google Scholar
Goriot, Claire, Roeland van Hout, Mirjam Broersma, Vanessa Lobo, James M. McQueen & Sharon Unsworth. 2021. Using the Peabody picture vocabulary test in L2 children and adolescents: Effects of L1. International Journal of Bilingual Education & Bilingualism 24(4). 546–568. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1494131.Suche in Google Scholar
Hamayan, Else, Fred Genesee & G. Richard Tucker. 1977. Affective factors and language exposure in second language learning. Language Learning 27(2). 225–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1977.tb00120.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Harrell, Frank E. 2015. Regression modeling strategies: With applications to linear models, logistic and ordinal regression, and survival analysis (Springer Series in Statistics), 2nd edn. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-19425-7Suche in Google Scholar
Hermanto, Nicola, Sylvain Moreno & Ellen Bialystok. 2012. Linguistic and metalinguistic outcomes of intense immersion education: How bilingual? International Journal of Bilingual Education & Bilingualism 15(2). 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2011.652591.Suche in Google Scholar
Hoff, Erika, Cynthia Core & Katherine F. Shanks. 2020. The quality of child-directed speech depends on the speaker’s language proficiency. Journal of Child Language 47(1). 132–145. https://doi.org/10.1017/S030500091900028X.Suche in Google Scholar
Hootsuite. 2019. Digital 2019 Q4 global digital statshot (October 2019) v01. Internet. https://www.slideshare.net/DataReportal/digital-2019-q4-global-digital-statshot-october-2019-v01 (accessed 18 November 2020).Suche in Google Scholar
Hu, Marcella Hsueh-Chao & Paul Nation. 2000. Unknown vocabulary density and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language 13(1). 403–430.Suche in Google Scholar
Kuppens, An H. 2010. Incidental foreign language acquisition from media exposure. Learning, Media & Technology 35(1). 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880903561876.Suche in Google Scholar
Laufer, Batia. 1996. The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don’t know, words you think you know, and words you can’t guess. In James Coady & Thomas Huckin (eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition, 1st edn. 20–34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524643.004Suche in Google Scholar
Lee, Ju Seong. 2019. Informal digital learning of English and second language vocabulary outcomes: Can quantity conquer quality? British Journal of Educational Technology 50(2). 767–778. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12599.Suche in Google Scholar
Lin, Jen-Jiun & Huifen Lin. 2019. Mobile-assisted ESL/EFL vocabulary learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning 32(8). 878–919. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1541359.Suche in Google Scholar
Lindgren, Eva & Carmen Muñoz. 2013. The influence of exposure, parents, and linguistic distance on young European learners’ foreign language comprehension. International Journal of Multilingualism 10(1). 105–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2012.679275.Suche in Google Scholar
Long, Michael H. 1980. Input, interaction, and second language acquisition. United States – California: University of California, Los Angeles PhD. https://www.proquest.com/docview/303009869/abstract/B6D354C3361C46DCPQ/1 (accessed 2 November 2023).Suche in Google Scholar
Lu, Marina Minhui. 2008. Effectiveness of vocabulary learning via mobile phone. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 24(6). 515–525. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00289.x.Suche in Google Scholar
Lyster, Roy & Fred Genesee. 2019. Immersion education. In Carol A. Chapelle (ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics, 1–6. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0525.pub2Suche in Google Scholar
McSweeney, Michelle A. 2017. I text English to everyone: Links between second-language texting and academic proficiency. Languages 2(3). 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages2030007.Suche in Google Scholar
Mol, Suzanne E. & Adriana G. Bus. 2011. To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin 137(2). 267–296. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021890.Suche in Google Scholar
Muñoz, Carmen. 2014. Contrasting effects of starting age and input on the oral performance of foreign language learners. Applied Linguistics 35(4). 463–482. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu024.Suche in Google Scholar
Muñoz, Carmen & David Singleton. 2011. A critical review of age-related research on L2 ultimate attainment. Language Teaching 44(01). 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444810000327.Suche in Google Scholar
Nation, Ian Stephen Paul & Rob Waring. 2019. Teaching extensive reading in another language. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780367809256Suche in Google Scholar
Olsson, Eva & Liss Kerstin Sylvén. 2015. Extramural English and academic vocabulary. A longitudinal study of CLIL and non-CLIL students in Sweden. Apples: Journal of Applied Language Studies 9(2). 77–103. https://doi.org/10.17011/apples/urn.201512234129.Suche in Google Scholar
Paradis, Johanne. 2011. Individual differences in child English second language acquisition: Comparing child-internal and child-external factors. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1(3). 213–237. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.1.3.01par.Suche in Google Scholar
Paradis, Johanne. 2019. English second language acquisition from early childhood to adulthood: The role of age, first language, cognitive, and input factors. In Megan M. Brown & Brady Dailey (eds.), 43rd Boston university conference on language development. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Paradis, Johanne. 2023. Sources of individual differences in the dual language development of heritage bilinguals. Journal of Child Language 50(4). 793–817. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000922000708.Suche in Google Scholar
Paradis, Johanne & Ruiting Jia. 2017. Bilingual children’s long-term outcomes in English as a second language: Language environment factors shape individual differences in catching up with monolinguals. Developmental Science 20(1). 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12433.Suche in Google Scholar
Paradis, Johanne, Adriana Soto-Corominas, Xi Chen & Alexandra Gottardo. 2020. How language environment, age, and cognitive capacity support the bilingual development of Syrian refugee children recently arrived in Canada. Applied Psycholinguistics 41(6). 1255–1281. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271642000017X.Suche in Google Scholar
Pavia, Niousha, Stuart Webb & Farahnaz Faez. 2019. Incidental vocabulary learning by listening to songs. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 41(4). 745–768. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000020.Suche in Google Scholar
Peters, Elke. 2018. The effect of out-of-class exposure to English language media on learners’ vocabulary knowledge. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics 169(1). 142–168. https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.00010.pet.Suche in Google Scholar
Peters, Elke, Ann-Sophie Noreillie, Kris Heylen, Bram Bulté & Piet Desmet. 2019. The impact of instruction and out-of-school exposure to foreign language input on learners’ vocabulary knowledge in two languages. Language Learning 69(3). 747–782. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12351.Suche in Google Scholar
Plester, Beverly, Clare Wood & Puja Joshi. 2009. Exploring the relationship between children’s knowledge of text message abbreviations and school literacy outcomes. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 27(1). 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1348/026151008X320507.Suche in Google Scholar
Prevoo, Mariëlle J. L., Malda Maike, Judi Mesman, Rosanneke A. G. Emmen, Nihal Yeniad, Marinus H. van Ijzendoorn & Mariëlle Linting. 2014. Predicting ethnic minority children’s vocabulary from socioeconomic status, maternal language and home reading input: Different pathways for host and ethnic language*. Journal of Child Language 41(5). 963–984. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000913000299.Suche in Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2023. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: https://www.r-project.org/.Suche in Google Scholar
Riley, Richard D., Kym I. E. Snell, Joie Ensor, Danielle L. Burke, Frank E. HarrellJr., Karel G. M. Moons & Gary S. Collins. 2019. Minimum sample size for developing a multivariable prediction model: Part I – Continuous outcomes. Statistics in Medicine 38(7). 1262–1275. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.7993.Suche in Google Scholar
Smith, Bryan. 2008. Methodological hurdles in capturing CMC data: The case of the missing self-repair. Language Learning & Technology 12(1). 85–103.Suche in Google Scholar
Soto-Corominas, Adriana, Johanne Paradis, Brian V. Rusk, Stefka Marinova-Todd & Xuan Zhang. 2020. Oral language profiles of English second language learners in adolescence: Cognitive and input factors influence how they compare to their monolingual peers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 42(4). 697–720.10.1017/S0272263119000767Suche in Google Scholar
Sun, He, Rasmus Steinkrauss, Jorge Tendeiro & Kees de Bot. 2016. Individual differences in very young children’s English acquisition in China: Internal and external factors. Bilingualism: Language & Cognition 19(3). 550–566. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000243.Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill. 1985. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Susan M. Gass & Carolyn G. Madden (eds.), Input in second language acquisition, 165–179. Cambridge, Mass: Newbury House Publishers.Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill. 1988. Manipulating and complementing content teaching to maximize second language learning. TESL Canada Journal 6(I). 68–83. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v6i1.542.Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill. 2005. The output hypothesis: Theory and research, vol. 14, (Ed.) Eli Hinkel. Mahwah: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill & Robert K. Johnson. 1997. Immersion education: A category within bilingual education. In Robert Keith Johnson & Merrill Swain (eds.), Immersion education: International perspectives, 1–16. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524667.003Suche in Google Scholar
Swain, Merrill & Wataru Suzuki. 2008. Interaction, output, and communicative language learning. In Bernard Spolsky & Francis M. Hult (eds.), The Handbook of educational linguistics, 557–570. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.10.1002/9780470694138.ch39Suche in Google Scholar
Thordardottir, Elin. 2019. Amount trumps timing in bilingual vocabulary acquisition: Effects of input in simultaneous and sequential school-age bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism 23. 236–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006917722418.Suche in Google Scholar
Uchikoshi, Yuuko. 2006. English vocabulary development in bilingual kindergarteners: What are the best predictors? Bilingualism: Language & Cognition 9(1). 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728905002361.Suche in Google Scholar
Unsworth, Sharon, Susanne Brouwer, Elise de Bree & Josje Verhagen. 2019. Predicting bilingual preschoolers’ patterns of language development: Degree of non-native input matters. Applied Psycholinguistics 40(5). 1189–1219. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716419000225.Suche in Google Scholar
Verheijen, Lieke. 2013. The effects of text messaging and instant messaging on literacy. English Studies 94(5). 582–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013838X.2013.795737.Suche in Google Scholar
Webb, Stuart. 2019. Incidental vocabulary learning. In Stuart Webb (ed.), The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies, vol. 15. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780429291586Suche in Google Scholar
Webb, Stuart & Anna C-S. Chang. 2015. How does prior word knowledge affect vocabulary learning progress in and extensive reading program? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 37(4). 651–675. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263114000606.Suche in Google Scholar
Wojcik, Stefan & Adam Hughes. 2019. Sizing up Twitter users. Pew Research Centre. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/04/24/sizing-up-twitter-users/ (accessed 18 November 2020).Suche in Google Scholar
Yuksel, Dogan & Banu Inan. 2014. The effects of communication mode on negotiation of meaning and its noticing. ReCALL 26(3). 333–354. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344014000147.Suche in Google Scholar
Zahar, Rick, Tom Cobb & Nina Spada. 2001. Acquiring vocabulary through reading: Effects of frequency and contextual richness. Canadian Modern Language Review 57(4). 541–572. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.4.541.Suche in Google Scholar
Ziegler, Nicole. 2016. Synchronous computer computer-mediated communication and interaction: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 38(3). 553–586. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311500025X.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston