BILINGUALISM AND THE EFFECTS OF LEARNING SECOND LANGUAGE

Bilingualism is the ability to use two languages. Definitions of bilingualism range from a
minimal proficiency in two languages, to an advanced level of proficiency which allows the speaker to
function and appear as a native-like speaker of two languages. A person may describe themselves as
bilingual but may mean only the ability to converse and communicate orally. Others may be proficient
in reading in two or more languages (or bi-literate). A person may be bilingual by virtue of having
grown up learning and using two languages simultaneously (simultaneous bilingualism). Or they may
become bilingual by learning a second language sometime after their first language. This is known as
sequential bilingualism. The use of the term ‘bilingual’ is thus dependent upon: context; linguistic
proficiency and purpose. Many educators use ‘bilingual pupils’ in preference to 'pupils learning EAL'
in order to heighten awareness of pupils' linguistic knowledge and expertise as well as their cultural
affiliations. Rampton (1990) suggests replacing terms such as 'native speaker' and 'mother tongue' with
language expertise, language affiliation and language inheritance. These terms may help trainees to
understand the complex nature of bilingualism and plurilingualism in multiethnic schools.

There are stages of early bilingual learning: When children who are in the early stages of learning
English, enter a setting, it is important for student teachers to understand what progression may
be expected in their development of English. Second language acquisition studies have
established recognisable early stages for second/additional language development and have
drawn particular attention to the silent period. The value of recognising the stages of learning
English as an additional language is that they provide a framework against which student
teachers' can exercise their judgement about an individual child’s progress, and provide
appropriate learning opportunities. Although there are individual differences in the way children
acquire an additional or second language, some researchers suggest that there is a consistent
developmental sequence. An overview of this process is described by American researcher Patton
Tabors;

1. There may be a period of time when children continue to use their home languages in the
second-language situation.
2. When they discover that their home language does not work in this situation, children enter a
non-verbal period as they collect information about the new language and perhaps spend some
time in sound experimentation.
3. Children begin to go public, using individual words and phrases in the new language.
4. Children begin to develop productive use of the second language.
(Tabors, 1997 p.39)

These stages of early language learning are set out in greater detail below

1. Continued use of the home language

When children enter an environment where the language they use to communicate at home is not
understood, they may continue to use their home language in the expectation that they will be
understood. Depending on the messages the children receive about the use of languages other than
English in the setting, this stage is likely to be relatively brief.

2. The Silent or Non Verbal Period

Many children when they enter an unfamiliar early years setting go through a period which has been
observed by a number of researchers as the ‘silent’ or ‘mute’ period. Some researchers refer to this as
the ‘non-verbal period’ to emphasise that children may continue to interact non-verbally. During the
Silent or Non-verbal period, children need time to acclimatise to the new context and to begin to tune
in to the sounds of English in the setting and to begin to know what is expected. During this time
children may begin to ‘rehearse’ the language silently to themselves and in time begin to practise the
utterances in ‘private speech’ until they have the confidence to try out the language for communicative
purposes or 'go public'. They require reassurance and encouragement at this time so that they feel they
are accepted members of the group.

The following is a snapshot of one bilingual child’s early experience of an afternoon at nursery.

Nazma enters nursery

Nazma enters nursery holding her sister's hand. Her sister, Yasmin (aged four and a half),
moves over to the large carpet where the children sit with the nursery teacher at the
beginning of every session. Nazma follows her, chewing her dress, staying close to her
sister and watching everything. She had stopped crying during the fifth week at nursery
and she now comes every afternoon. The children listen to the teacher talking about
caterpillars and many join in the discussion in English. Nazma is silent. Mussarat, the
Bilingual Classroom Assistant, enters the nursery. She gathers a small group of Pahari
speaking children together to share a book. This activity had been planned with the
nursery teacher and linked to the current topic. The children switch into Pahari (their
mother tongue) for this activity. Nazma listens and points to a picture of a dog (kutha) and
cat (billee) in an Urdu alphabet picture book, but does not speak. They go outside to play.
Nazma stands on the outside watching the other children and holds Mussarat's hand. She
has learnt the climbing frame routine and repeats the climbing and sliding activity several
times. The children go inside and choose from a range of play activities. Nazma watches.
She stays at an activity for one minute and moves on. This is repeated several times. Then
she wanders around the room sucking her fingers. It is now story time on the carpet. The
children sit and listen to the story of 'The Very Hungry Caterpillar'. Nazma sits close to
her sister and watches. Their mother appears at the door and they go home.

(Drury, 2007 p.31)

When Nazma first entered nursery she met an abrupt change of both language and cultural
expectations. In an English only environment, she was in effect dispossessed of her ability to
communicate and the impact of this on a three or four year old can be profoundly disturbing. During
her early days in the nursery, none of the monolingual nursery staff engaged with Nazma except for
classroom management purposes, and there was little verbal interaction between her and other children
in the nursery. Nazma is experiencing the non-verbal or silent period.

Strategies for the Non-verbal or Silent Period

Priscilla Clarke (1992) suggests ten strategies to support children’s language development during this
stage:

1. Continued talking even when children do not respond.

2. Persistent inclusion in small groups with other children;
3. Use of varied questions;
4. Inclusion of other children as the focus in the conversation;
5. Use of the first language;
6. Acceptance of non-verbal responses;
7. Praising of minimal effort;
8. Expectations to respond with repeated words and/or counting;
9. Structuring of programme to encourage child to child interaction;
10. Provide activities which reinforce language practice through role play.
(Clarke, 1992 p.17-18)

3. Repetition and language play, use of formulae, routines and single words
Children begin to use single words or formulaic phrases and repetition during the early stages of
learning English. They use formulae and chunks of language as ready made phrases in routine
situations. This enables the learners to interact with others. These chunks of language may include
memorised sequences in singing rhymes and stories, routine language used at specific times in the
setting, for example ‘happy birthday’, answering the register, asking to go to the toilet.

The following is a snapshot of four year old Samia during one session in her first term at nursery.

Samia enters nursery

Samia enters Lucca Harris nursery holding her mother’s hand. She finds her ‘giraffe’
picture and places it on the ‘planning board’. She has planned her worktime in the art and
craft area and she stands watching a nursery nurse organising a hand painting activity at
the painting table. The children are each making hand printed cards for mother’s day. She
takes a turn at the activity in silence, except for the correct one word response to questions
about the colour of the paint and the card-‘What’s that colour?’ ‘Yellow’. Samia then
moves onto the carpet where children are playing with a wooden train set, solid shapes
and small construction materials. She is silent while she plays on her own. After a few
minutes, another child takes one of her shapes and she protests ‘No, mine, not yours.
Look.’ There is no response and she continues playing. Talk is going on around her, but it
is not addressed to Samia. The nursery teacher walks past the carpet and Samia attracts
her attention, ‘Mrs Ashley, look.’ The teacher walks away and it is tidy up time. Samia
sits with the teacher in a group of seven children for small group time. The focus is the
song ‘Heads, shoulders, knees and toes’ and playing a game to teach the parts of the body.
She joins in the refrain of the song ‘Knees and toes’, listens, watches attentively and
participates mainly non-verbally during the game. Then the teacher directs the children:
‘It’s time to go out in the garden’. She finds Samia sitting on her own singing to herself
‘knees and toes, knees and toes’, before she goes out to play.
(Drury, 2007 p. 37)

This observation of Samia during a nursery session provides one view of her learning; in the nursery
context during her first term of formal schooling. There are approximately 30 children in the morning
session of the nursery which Samia attends for two and a half hours a day. Nearly half of the children
are bilingual and the majority of these are Pahari speakers. The monolingual nursery teacher works
with two monolingual nursery nurses and a part-time bilingual classroom assistant. The structure and
routines of the nursery are particularly significant as it follows a High/Scope approach to the
curriculum. This encourages the children to ‘plan’ their activities using a planning board when they
first arrive in the morning, to ‘do’ the activity during ‘work time’ and then to ‘review’ or ‘recall’ their
learning with their key adult in a small group. We have seen elements of this in Samia’s ‘school game’
at home when she refers to ‘group time’ in her play.
During her first term at nursery, Samia had to learn a wide range of rules and routines to do with how
time and space was organised in the nursery and with the behaviour that was expected. And at the end
of her first term she had gone beyond the initial stage of insecurity in a new environment. She had the
confidence to attract the teacher’s attention when necessary and to object when shapes she was playing
with were taken by other children - ‘No, mine. Not yours’. Nevertheless, her still limited
understanding of English meant that her acculturation in the setting precipitated times of stress and
difficulty. The process of adaptation involved a new shaping of her identity as Samia discovered and
internalised what was acceptable in the socio-cultural environment. Willett (1995) pointed out that
learners acquire more than linguistic rules through interactional routines: ‘they also appropriate
identities, social relations and ideologies’ (Willett, 1995: 477).

4. More complex English or productive language use

Children begin to develop productive use of the additional language which means they can build on
and extend the use of single words and chunks of English to produce more complex language. They
may combine some of the chunks they have acquired and begin to produce longer and more complex
sentences which approximate more closely to the intended meaning.

In reality, these stages may well overlap, depending on the context and expectations. For example,
Samia’s ‘school game’ reveals how she was confidently producing more complex English in the
home/play setting than in the nursery. In her ‘school game’, her use of English, her facility for code-
switching, her ability to engage, sustain and direct her younger brother’s involvement, her
manipulation of school knowledge (for example, colours) demonstrate her developing bilingualism. It
is interesting to note that the private, very safe, play context at home provided her opportunities to
rehearse thse skills before she ‘went public’ in the nursery setting. Similarly, young children's
language use may well vary within the context of the setting. Student teachers should therefore be alert
to these differences.

In the same way as children learn their first language, sequential bilingual learners must also
learn how to use their newly acquired language accurately and appropriately. Although the process of
language learning may be similar, there are also differences. For example, bilingual learners address
the process of learning another language already possessing knowledge of a linguistic system, its
structures and rules. In addition, sequential bilingual learners start learning their second language at
different ages, rather than from birth, and will be able to use different learning strategies. Many
linguists believe there is a 'critical period' (lasting roughly from birth until puberty) during which a
child can easily acquire any language that he or she is regularly exposed to. Under this view, the
structure of the brain changes at puberty, and after that it becomes harder to learn a new language.
This means that it is much easier to learn a second language during childhood than as an adult. Apart
from the above, children do tend to develop more native-like pronunciation when bilingualism begins
before adolescence.

Second language development would appear to proceed in an orderly fashion. Researchers have
discovered that there is a fairly common sequence of acquisition for second language learners across a
range of languages and contexts. What is not known is exactly what aspects of the second language are
learned in what sequence. However it is known that some aspects are learned when there is a
perceived need by the learner and some items can be learned in no particular sequence. Other research
has suggested that there is a developmental sequence which precludes the early learning of certain
items. Second language learners will demonstrate some of the stages of first language development.
For example, they may go through a period when a rule is generalised to all instances. However, the
rate of acquisition and the level of proficiency achieved in second language learning will depend upon
the individual learner.

The popular belief that younger children have an advantage over adults in developing bilingually is
not necessarily true. Early acquisition of the speech sound system of a language may result in a native-
like pronunciation and the impression of fluency, but older learners may have an advantage in terms of
increased metalinguistic awareness that enables them to learn the new language more quickly. For the
young child, bilingual development is taking place alongside conceptual development and learning
about the world. For older learners who have greater knowledge and understanding, it is the learning
of new labels for objects, ideas and concepts already known. As they learn the new language, second
language learners incorporate the new linguistic input into their existing model of the language. There
are many aspects of language that are common. For example all languages have ways of denoting
time, of indicating actions and actors. Languages do this with different vocabularies and often with
different grammars, but all languages are rule-governed. Part of the process of language acquisition
involves the discovery and application of these rules. 'Interlanguage' is the term used to describe the
language that learners produce as they learn the second language. It is also used to describe the
evolving development of the learner's knowledge and use of the second language as they become
increasingly proficient. It will change as the learner learns more and incorporates new linguistic
knowledge into existing knowledge. Error analysis appears to suggest that the majority of interlingual
errors are developmental and a sign of progress.

Learners and their learning strategies will change over time. A five year old will have a different
language learning profile and language learning strategies than a fifteen year old. For bilingual
learners, their first language knowledge will be helpful in the acquisition of the second language. The
extent of this help will be dependent upon their proficiency in their first language, their age and other
factors.

For young bilingual children entering an English medium setting in which they have yet to
learn the language, the processes of language learning, social interaction and enculturation are closely
linked. As Ochs states: ‘It is evident that acquisition of linguistic knowledge and acquisition of socio-
cultural knowledge are interdependent…Children develop concepts of a socio-culturally structured
universe through their participation in language activities’ (Ochs, 1988:14)

The need to engage in social interaction with peers can be a particular difficulty for young developing
bilingual children in the early years. The ability to interact with others, and the understanding of the
shared cultural framework essential for learning are closely related to the acquisition of English. At the
same time, the learning of English depends on being able to interpret the cultural rules and
expectations of the setting, and on being able to successfully engage in activities and interact with
peers. This interdependence of language acquisition and social interaction is referred to by Tabors
(1997) as a ‘double bind’ which many children who are new to English may experience for a period of
time.

In the vignette below we see how young bilingual children starting school face the challenges of
learning both the language and culture they find in early years settings.

Amadur and Mohiuddin start Reception

The outer door opened and Amadur and Mohiuddin were shepherded in by their mothers.
As it closed behind them, all four stood stiffly just inside the room, staring ahead. Mrs
Goode approached them with a welcoming smile: ‘Hi there, come in, lovely to see you!
Mums, you can go, these two will be fine. Come on boys.’ She took the hands of the 4
year-olds and led them cheerfully towards the sandbox, leaving their mothers to exchange
glances and then exit, backwards through the door. Amadur and Mohiuddin stood beside
the sandbox looking blank and bewildered. Mrs Goode collected shovels, gave one to
each of them, and dug industriously herself. After a few moments both boys dutifully
squatted on the floor and begun to dig, in imitation. They continued this way for some
time, and Mrs Goode, after praising their efforts, moved off to another activity. The two
boys, who were cousins, slowed their shovelling, stopped, and stared at each other.
(Brooker, 2005, p.115)

As Amadur and Mohiuddin enter Reception, they encounter the rules and expectations of their new
social world. Haste states that ‘in acquiring these rules, the child learns the basis for interactions with
others, and the shared cultural framework for making sense of the world’ (Haste, 1987, p.163). The
acquisition of these rules represents a significant challenge, including the ability to interact with others
and to engage in activities and the understanding of the shared cultural assumptions. The norms of the
reception class culture are not necessarily made explicit and may only be understood through patterns
of behaviour and through the subtle and indirect forms of language used to express approval and
disapproval. These may be difficult for a developing bilingual child to interpret. One example of the
rules which children are expected to understand and follow is that children should choose an activity
and participate in play, independently and with others.

In addition, developing bilingual children have to start the process of learning English, and this
involves not only language learning itself, but also understanding how to socially interact and what is
valued in the new social context. They also need to discover what is acceptable from their existing
knowledge which includes the use of their home language. The use of mother tongue, which has so far
been a central aspect of their conceptual development at home, is likely to be increasingly unavailable
in most early years settings. As a consequence, the linguistic basis of much of the learning of new
concepts may not be accessible to young bilingual children.

Tabors highlights the importance of the social context of the early years setting for young bilingual
children’s learning and suggests that without careful consideration of this ‘they may spend their time
playing alone silently, or humming, singing, or talking to themselves…’ (1997, p38). Drury’s study of
three four year old bilingual children learning at home and at school reveals how the child herself may
play a critical role in enabling a move beyond this double bind by rehearsing and practising classroom
learning in the home (Drury, 2007).

BICS and CALP

These terms are commonly used in discussion of bilingual education. They arise from the
early work of Cummins (1984) in which he demonstrated his ideas about second language
development in a simple matrix. BICS describes the development of conversational fluency (Basic
Interpersonal Communicative Skills) in the second language, whereas CALP describes the use of
language in decontextualized academic situations ( Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency ).

The horizontal axis of the BICS/CALP matrix represents a continuum from 'context-embedded' to
'context-reduced', ranging from the situation in which the learner uses external clues and information,
such as facial gestures, real objects and pictorial representation to enable understanding, to the other
extreme where the learner must rely on linguistic cues, and knowledge about language and text to
understand meanings. The vertical axis relates to the degree of cognitive involvement in a task, and
moves from tasks that are not very demanding to increasing challenging activities. So, an activity in
the lower left corner (cognitively undemanding and context-embedded) such as matching words to a
picture might be appropriate for a beginner, but tasks in the upper right corner (more cognitively
demanding and context-reduced) such as a poem by Keats, would be a task for advanced learners.
Cummins' model has proved helpful in identifying and developing appropriate tasks for bilingual
pupils. For example, in preparing tasks for a newly arrived second language learner, teachers might
start with contextualized tasks and practical activities that are of low cognitive demand, such as
naming items or a simple matching exercise. More proficient learners would require contextual
support, but would need more cognitively demanding tasks. This approach to planning and assessing
EAL learners was developed and reported in Cline and Frederickson (1996).
In conceptualizing bilingual proficiency in this way, Cummins and other researchers suggest that it
takes learners, on average, approximately two years to achieve a functional, social use of a second
language but that it may take five to seven years or longer, for some bilingual learners to achieve a
level of academic linguistic proficiency comparable to monolingual English speaking peers.

Common Underlying Proficiency

Cummins (1984 and 2000) also argues for a common underlying proficiency or interdependence
hypothesis, in which cross-lingual proficiencies can promote the development of cognitive, academic
skills. Common underlying proficiency refers to the interdependence of concepts, skills and linguistic
knowledge found in a central processing system. Cummins states that cognitive and literacy skills
established in the mother tongue or L1 will transfer across languages. This is often presented visually
as two icebergs representing the two languages which overlap and share, underneath the water line, a
common underlying proficiency or operating system. Both languages are outwardly distinct but are
supported by shared concepts and knowledge derived from learning and experience and the cognitive
and linguistic abilities of the learner.

This representation also demonstrates one view of how linguistic knowledge is stored in the brain. One
way of thinking of this is to consider bilingual speakers as having separately stored proficiencies in
each language, and this may include pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar in the working memory,
which in turn, have access to long-term memory storage that is not language specific. In other words,
the use of the first or second language is informed by the working memory, but the concepts are stored
as underlying proficiency.

Cummins also describes language proficiency in terms of surface and deeper levels of thinking skills.
He argues that the deeper levels of cognitive processing such as analysis, synthesis and evaluation are
necessary to academic progress. He distinguishes these aspects of proficiency from what he describes
as more explicit or superficial realisations of linguistic and cognitive processing. Cummins proposes a
minimum threshold of first language cognitive/academic development necessary for success in second
language learning. Cummins also suggests that if the threshold of cognitive proficiency is not
achieved, the learner may have difficulties achieving bilingual proficiency.
This representation of bilingual proficiency would also suggest that continued conceptual and
linguistic development in the first language would help second language learners in their learning of
the second language. So the continued support of the first language whilst learning the second
language would be beneficial for cognitive development as well as for other socio-cultural reasons. In
his later work, Cummins (2000) presents the work of many other researchers which support this
hypothesis and the claim that bilingualism and continued development in the first language enhances
metalinguistic skills and development in proficiency in the second language.

Threshold Hypothesis

The threshold hypothesis assumes that a child needs to achieve a certain level of proficiency or
competence in the first or second language to take advantage of the benefits of bilingualism. A
minimum threshold needs to be achieved if there are to be any benefits from bilingualism, and this
hypothesis posits that if there is a low level of competence in both languages there may be negative
consequences. Sometimes this has been referred to as semi-lingualism, but this term and description is
not often used nowadays. It would seem that there needs to be a minimum level of linguistic and
conceptual knowledge in the first language to successfully add a second and develop bilingually. At
the upper threshold, 'additive bilingualism' occurs when 'balanced bilinguals' have age appropriate
competence in both languages. This conceptualization of bilingualism is often depicted as a steps in a
ladder or floors in a house. This threshold hypothesis cannot be defined in absolute terms, rather it is a
theoretical description, but it can help in explaining the development of bilingual learners. It also
supports the arguments for the benefits of additive bilingualism and bilingual education.

There are several implications and benefits of additive bilingualism for teaching and learning. For
example, bilingual education may provide the greatest support for bilingual learners in the
development of their second or additional language. It is important that new input is connected to the
learner's previous knowledge, including linguistic, conceptual and learned knowledge. It would seem
that additive bilingualism has positive consequences for learners' metalinguistic development, learning
of additional languages and more generally, for learners' verbal cognitive operations. The threshold
hypothesis also suggests that both languages must be given an opportunity to develop if there is to be a
long-term positive impact. Additive bilingualism brings with it many positive attributes that can
enable learners' linguistic and academic development.

Large numbers of ethnic minority pupils in British schools have spent a significant proportion of their
lives in Britain and use everyday colloquial English with ease. Many of these pupils may have reached
a 'plateau' in which they do not seem able to make further progress in English. Current systems in
education continue to identify such pupils as one-dimensional bilinguals speaking a minority language
at home whilst learning English at school. These concepts may be little help for teachers in developing
adequate teaching approaches and strategies. Harris (1997) argues that we should rethink the
‘romantic’ notion of bilingualism and take a more realistic look at what we call ‘bilingual learners’ in
face of the multilingual and multiethnic youth who inhabit a world where language, culture and
ethnicity are fluid and change from generation to generation. His interviews with pupils about their
language use reveal a complex linguistic and cultural picture of these bilingual and plurilingual pupils:

"My first language is English. I read, write, speak and think in English. I also speak Gujarati because
my mum and dad are Gujarati first language speakers...my mum speaks to me in Gujarati and I answer
back in English, which is common."

"I know Punjabi, Urdu, Swahili, German, English and Arabic. I can speak Punjabi perfectly and
understand it very well. I know a lot of German, and I know how to speak it, and understand it and
write it mainly. I know Arabic very little but can write a little bit of it."

The series of pupil portraits written by serving teachers provide further accounts of the language
affiliations and learning of bilingual learners in schools.

Conclusion

Bilingualism is found in all parts of the world, at all levels of society, in all age groups. Even in
countries with many monolinguals, the percentage of bilinguals is high. For example, based on
Statistics Canada, one can estimate that the bilingual population in Canada is probably around 35
percent. One can become bilingual in childhood, but also in adolescence and in adulthood. In fact,
many adults become bilingual because they move from one country (or region) to another and have to
acquire a second language. With time, they can become just as bilingual as children who acquire their
languages in their early years (minus the native speaker accent). In general, people become bilingual
because life requires the use of two or more languages. This can be due to immigration, education,
intermarriage, contact with other linguistic groups within a country, and so on. Some bilinguals have
grown up learning two languages simultaneously and hence have two first languages with which they
will express their emotions. And for the majority of bilinguals who have acquired their languages
successively-first one language and then, some years later, another-the pattern is not clear. Emotions
and bilingualism produce a very complicated but also very personal reality that has no set rules. Some
bilinguals prefer to use one language, some the other, and some use both of them to express their
feelings and emotions.

Bilinguals know their languages to the level that they need them. Some bilinguals are dominant in one
language, others do not know how to read and write one of their languages, others have only passive
knowledge of a language and, finally, a very small minority, have equal and perfect fluency in their
languages. What is important to keep in mind is that bilinguals are very diverse, as are monolinguals.
Mixing languages such as code-switching and borrowing is a very common behavior in bilinguals
speaking to other bilinguals. It is a bit like having coffee with milk instead of just straight black. The
two language repertoires are available in bilingual situations and can be used at will. Many
expressions and words are better said in the one or the other language; mixing permits to use the right
one without having recourse to translation which simply may not do justice to what one wants to
express. This said, in other situations, bilinguals know that they cannot mix their languages (e.g. when
speaking to monolinguals) and they then stick to just one language.

Since 20th century much research has shown that bilingual children are not delayed in their language
acquisition. This said, one should keep in mind that bilingual children, because they have to deal with
two or more languages, are different in some ways from monolingual children, but definitely not on
rate of language acquisition. As for bilingual children with language challenges (e.g. dyslexia), they
are not proportionally more numerous than monolingual children with the same challenges.
If bilingual children interact in both bilingual and monolingual situations, then they learn to mix
languages at certain times only. When they are with monolinguals (e.g. Grandma who doesn’t speak
any English), they quickly learn to speak just the one language (communication breaks down
otherwise). It is important though that the situation be truly monolingual (and not a “pretend
situation” in which a bilingual parent pretends not to know the other language); children will make an
effort to speak only one language if they feel it is vital for communication. Thus, caretakers will want
to create natural monolingual environments where children will need, and hence use, just one
language. The home language can be used as a linguistic base for acquiring aspects of the other
language. It also gives children a known language to communicate in (with parents, caretakers, and,
perhaps, teachers) while acquiring the other. There are many ways of making sure a child grows up
bilingual: caretaker 1 speaks one language and caretaker 2 speaks the other; one language is used in
the home and the other outside the home; the child acquires his/her second language at school, etc.
The critical factor is NEED. The child must come to realize, most of the time unconsciously, that
he/she needs two or more languages in everyday life. This is where the one person - one language
approach often breaks down as the bilingual child quickly realizes that the weaker (often minority)
language is not really needed (the caretakers or other family members often speak the other, stronger
language, to one another, so why keep up the weaker language?). A better approach is that all family
members use the weaker language at home, if at all possible, so as to increase the child’s exposure to it
and mark the language’s “main” territory.

Baker (1996) discusses cognitive, social and affective benefits of bilingualism. Others, from around
the world, have explored the benefits of bilingualism and identified increased metacognitive and
metalinguistic knowledge and heightened communicative sensitivity (Ben-Zeev, 1977; Bialystok,
1991). A positive link between children’s bilingualism and concept formation, classification,
creativity, analogical reasoning and visual-spatial skills (eg. Diaz and Klingler, 1991) has also been
discovered. Similarly, research has revealed a link between bilingualism and heightened language
awareness and greater cognitive flexibility (Hamers and Blanc, 1988; Gombert, 1992). Many of these
studies have focused on older children, but Kenner’s (2000; 2004) work is a notable exception in that
she has revealed similar benefits with younger children in London schools. Also working in the
English context, Robertson (2002) shows how in early years settings the benefits of bilingualism are
generally overlooked. For example many 5-year old children routinely learn to read in more than two
languages in English settings and schools but the strengths accrued on the way remain hidden from
teachers. Having a knowledge of different languages also provides access to different sets of cultural
meaning.

The early years forms a critical stage in children’s development. If children are to become and remain
bilingual, settings and schools have a role to play in providing opportunities for additive rather than
subtractive bilingualism. This means that English needs to be added to children's overall language
repertoire rather than replacing or displacing their first languages. Thus the setting needs to make sure
that by introducing English, children's first languages are not subtracted from the process. One way
that this can happen is to ensure that children have continued opportunities to hear and use their first
languages. A number or research studies have demonstrated how the continued use of home languages
in school speeds the process of learning the school language ( see Key Summary of Thomas and
Collier, 2002). This is a powerful, winning argument. The more practitioners provide opportunities for
bilingual children to use their home languages in the early years setting, the easier it is for them to
learn English. If we are, therefore, committed to supporting young children to learn in the most
effective ways and to achieve the highest possible results in English, we should provide varied and
continued opportunities for using home languages across the early years phase and into primary and
secondary schools. Being able to discuss new concepts in mother tongue, and relating previously
learnt concepts to new English words and terms, helps all children to learn, and it is this conceptual
learning in its broadest sense that has a positive (knock on) effect on learning English, too.
 REFERENCES

Baker, C. (1996) Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 2nd Edition. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters

Bialystok, E. (2001) Bilingualism in Development: Language, Literacy and Cognition. Cambridge :

Cambridge University Pres

Brooker, L. (2005) Learning to be a child: Cultural diversity and early years ideology. In Yelland, N.
(ed) Critical Issues in Early Childhood Education. Maidenhead: Open University Pres

Clarke, P. (1992) English as a 2nd Language in Early Childhood. FKA Multicultural Resources
Centre. Richmond: Victoria, Australia

Cline, T. & Frederickson, N. (Eds.) (1996) Curriculum Related Assessment, Cummins and Bilingual
Children. Clevedon : Multilingual Matters

Cummins, J. (1984) Bilingualism and special education. Clevedon : Multilingual Matters

Cummins, J. (2000) Language, Power and Pegagogy. Clevedon : Multimlingual Matters

Diaz, R. and Klingler, C. (1991) Towards an explanatory model of the interaction between
bilingualism and cognitive development. In Bialystok, E. (ed) Language Processing in Bilingual
Children. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Drury, R. (2007) Young Bilingual Learners at Home and School. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham

Gombert, F. (1992) Metalinguistic Development. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf

Harris, R. (1997) 'Romantic Bilingualism: time for a change?' in Leung, C. & Cable, C. (Eds.) English
as an Additional Language: Changing Perspectives. Watford: NALDIC

Haste, H. (1987) Growing into rules in Bruner, J. and Haste, H. (eds.) Making sense: The child’s
construction of the world. London: Methuen

Ochs, E. (1988) Introduction. In B. Schiefflin, & E. Ochs (eds) Language Socialisation across
cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres

Rampton, B. (1990) Displacing the "native speaker": Expertise, affiliation and inheritance ELT
Journal, 44, 97-101

Robertson, L. H. (2002) Parallel literacy classes and hidden strengths: learning to read in English,
Urdu and classical Arabic. Reading, literacy and language (UKRA), November, 36/3, pp. 119-126

Tabors, P. (1997) One Child, Two Languages: a guide for Preschool Educators of Children Learning
English as a Second Language. Baltimore: Paul Brookes Publishing

Thomas, W. P. and Collier, V. (2002). A National Study of School Effectiveness for Language
Minority Students’ Long-Term Academic Achievement. Center for Research on Education, Diversity
and Excellence (CREDE).

Willett, J. (1995) Becoming first graders in an L2 classroom: An ethnographic study of L2

socialisation. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 473-503