Work Package 3: Early LanguagePromoting and supporting language development in multilingual and multicultural early childhood settings

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication [communication] reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Euline Cutrim SchmidTimo Meister

Outline

• Aims of the “Early Language” component of the TODDLER project

• Overview of data collection process• Summary of findings• Theoretical underpinnings• Best practice examples • Criteria for the evaluation of best practice

Research Goals• identify families’ and practitioners’ attitudes

towards different languages and cultures • Identify examples of best practice (innovative

projects and initiatives) that enhance language learning and multicultural awareness in pre-school settings

Data CollectedQuestionnaires

– Characteristics of childcare/daycare center – Characteristics of the children attending the childcare/daycare center – Characteristics of the Early Years Practitioners working in the

childcare/daycare center

Observation– Types of input the children are exposed to, the kinds of interactions they

engage in and the topics that are addressed by both EYPs and children– Strategies used by the childcare/daycare center to promote multilingualism

and multiculturalism in everyday situations

Best Practice Examples– innovative approaches to support and promote the development of the L1 as

well as additional languages in early childhood settings – Examples provided by the various European partners involved in the project

Partners

Belgium – FlandersBelgium – Wallonia

Norway

Spain

Denmark

Germany

Romania

Portugal

England

Quantitative Observation Data• In total 238 observations from 9 partner

countries• 3 points of time of observation

June/July 1st 2011 November 2nd 2011 – February 2012 June/July 3rd 2012

• Data Analysis with SPSS Software

Observation Checklist

Descriptive Statistics

Summary of Findings IQuestionnaires

– The great majority of the EYPs see linguistic and cultural diversity as an opportunity

– Most EYPs do not feel confident on how to deal with multilingualism and multiculturalism in their everyday work

– 3 out of 9 ECEC settings offer special language support programs for the acquisition of children’s mother tongues.

– 5 out of 9 ECEC settings offer special language support programs for the acquisition of the ambient language.

– Parents tend to consider the ambient language as more important or at least as important as the L1.

– Most common activities promoting multilingualism and multiculturalism in the settings investigated:

• working with books and stories that represent different social and cultural realities • celebrating multicultural festivals• working with books written in other languages than the ambient language.• cultural differences are represented through pictures, artifacts, maps

Summary of Findings IIObservation Checklists (language input and interaction)

– 48% of the children had an L1 other than the ambient language, and 20% of EYPs had an L1 other than the ambient language.

– Although most settings investigated were characterized by a large number of children with a migration background, the data seem to indicate that their home languages are not always effectively acknowledged.

– In average the results show that the input level and the level of language support are below ideal standards.

– The data show considerable variation among the different countries.

Best Practice Examples– There are a good number of top-down and bottom-up initiatives promoting

multilingual and multicultural education in Europe.– In the process of including children’s diverse linguistic and cultural

backgrounds, there is the danger of emphasizing the difference. – Some educational approaches that work very well in specific countries would

not necessarily be successful (or even possible) in other countries due to the different policies, beliefs, curricula and so on.

The Training ModuleReflecting on the learning conditions for disadvantaged children in early childhood settings, with a specific focus on early language acquisition. This module includes: a) tools for examining the amount and quality of language

support in pre-school settingsb) theoretical input on early language development, c) case studies developed in nine European countries, d) examples of best practice based on criteria discussed in the

scientific literature ande) Reflective questionsf) references to web resources.

Examples of Best PracticeTheoretical Underpinnings

Theoretical Underpinnings– Linguists emphasize the important role played by instructors in

creating supportive language learning opportunities (Vygotsky, 1978; Bruner, 1983, Krashen, 1981, Long, 1980).

– Most linguists agree upon the fact that children should be encouraged to continue their native language development (Baker, 2011)

– Linguists highlight the important role of the first language in the child's learning and in their acquisition of additional languages (e.g. Cummins, 1981, Lambert, 1987)

– The more each language in the child’s repertoire is developed, the higher the chance that the child develops optimally (Griebel, et. al, 2013)

– EYPs who are multilingual or “plurilingual” are in a better position to help children to build their plurilingual resources (Siraj-Blatchford & Clarke, 2011)

Example of Best Practice: NorwayThe ‘World of Book’ Project

Førresfjorden barnehage municipal early childhood education center for children (age 1-5)Key Issues:

1. How can we offer every child good reading experiences according to their age level?

2. How can we promote and stimulate the children’s mother tongue without staff members that speak their languages?

Based on current policy - White paper no. 41 (2008), which states that: “Children belonging to indigenous groups and linguistic and cultural minorities must be supported to be part of both majority and minority cultures”.

The World of Book Project1. Book Boxes

– A book box contains a picture book with objects/props related to the story of this specific book. – Rationale: When these objects/props are used together with the reading of the text, the children can

get some extra support to understand the story. – 16 different book boxes have been created.

2. Translation of Picture Books – The 16 picture books were translated to all the languages represented in the kindergarten. – Process: members of staff copy the book, get the text translated in the family language (they use

professional translators), fill in the translated text, laminate the pages and tie them with metal rings.

3. Parents as Crucial Collaborators– Parents are seen as crucial collaborators when new books are introduced. – The translated picture books are handed out to parents who read these books for their child at home.

Example of Best Practice: GermanyFairy Tale Treasure: A Multicultural Project

Key aims:1. Using fairy tales to promote multicultural awareness. 2. Raising children’s awareness to the fact that different cultures share

similar wishes and dreams, values and beliefs, which are then reflected in the fairy tales they create.

In this storytelling project, the EYPs acknowledged the multicultural character of the crèche group and used the children’s diverse backgrounds to enrich the learning environment.

Fairy Tale Treasure: A Multicultural Project

1. Step 1 (preliminary phase)– identifying the nationalities/cultures represented in the (crèche)– finding fairy tales in the ambient culture which share similarities with fairy tales

from other cultures represented in the group– For this specific project, the fairy tales “Der Fischer und Seine Frau” (German)

and “The Lucky Fish” (Thai) were chosen because some children in the crèche group had a Thai background.

2. Step 2 (implementing the project – Day 1)– On the first day, the EYPs worked with the German fairy tale. The children were

taken into an imaginary journey into the land of the fairy tales and listened to the story “Der Fischer und Seine Frau”.

– After the first storytelling phase, the EYPs encouraged the children to reflect on the fairy tale together by asking comprehension questions.

– A special focus was given to the main characters and their names. The children were shown pictures of the main characters and asked to repeat their names.

– These pictures were then hung on the classroom wall.

Fairy Tale Treasure: A Multicultural Project

3. Step 3 (implementing the project – Day 2) – On the second day the children were told the Thai fairy tale in the ambient

language (German). – Reference is made to the culture, from which the foreign fairy tales comes:

Thailand. Attention is also drawn to the child in the group who has a Thai background.

– In the follow-up phase the children were encouraged to reflect on the similarities between the two fairy tales in terms of plot, characters, general message and so on.

– Since both stories used the same archetypes of characters, the EYPs worked with the same pictures of characters, which had been hung on the wall on the previous day. This time, however, the children were introduced to their names in Thai.

– After repeating the new words orally, the children were shown the written versions of characters names in German and Thai. which were then added to the pictures on the wall.

– The Thai child was invited to participate actively, by checking the pronunciation of Thai words and by paying special attention to the written versions.

Criteria for Best PracticeSplit up into small groups

• Discuss some criteria for best practice in promoting multilingualism and multiculturalism in early childhood settings

• You can use the examples that have been presented as a starting point

• Create a list with 10 criteria (e.g. EYPs take into account children’s previous cultural experiences in the design and implementation of different activities)

• The list should be created by taking the following aspects into account a) theoretical underpinnings b) practical work experience and c) practicability in a stressful daily routine

Examples of criteria for the evaluation of best practice in promoting multilingualism and multiculturalism in early childhood settings

Examples of Criteria IThe institution:

– acknowledges , celebrates and reflects the different cultures present in the community (e.g. classrooms have multicultural displays e.g. flags, toys, etc…).

– adopts a multicultural curriculum.– recruits EYPs and support staff who are multilingual– develops projects focusing on multilingual (ML) and

multicultural (ML) issues. – Develops MC and ML related projects that have a long

term perspective.

Examples of Criteria IIThe EYPS:

– have a good degree of awareness about their own language, the language of the children and about language development in general.

– are equipped with resources (time/staff/material/in-service training/money) to support the language development of children from various linguistic and cultural backgrounds.

– use effective scaffolding techniques to support the development of the home language and of additional languages.

– take into account children’s previous cultural experiences in the design and implementation of different activities.

– use objects or artifacts that reflect the cultures of the children. – Work closely with parents (e.g. staff members support parents in choosing appropriate language

learning resources to be used at home).– Create opportunities for children to join in and express themselves even if they don’t have a good

command of the ambient language. (e.g. by using songs and rhymes)– Support language development during all ECEC activities, even if they don’t have a focus on

language (e. g. toilet time and games)– Help children who don’t have a good command of the ambient language to develop effective

compensation strategies that allow them to use the language in spite of their gaps in knowledge. – Learn a few words/phrases in children’s L1s in order to be able to communicate with children in

the first stages of integration.

Examples of Criteria III

The children:– Receive adequate support for acquiring the ambient language.– Receive adequate support for continuing their native language

development. – Are exposed to native or at least near-native levels of ambient

language and/or L1. – are allowed to use their home languages at the ECEC setting in

interaction with other children or even with EYPs. – Are exposed to stories, songs, games and other activities that

represent different cultures. – are encouraged to engage with bi- or multilingual materials (e.g.

bilingual books). – are encouraged to use objects and educational resources that reflect

the ambient culture as well as other cultures.

Examples of Criteria IVThe parents:

– participate in the design and implementation of minority language learning activities as ‘language experts’.

– receive information about the importance of learning the L1.– receive especial support (e.g. photo books, translation) for

understanding the principles and structure of the ECEC setting. – are invited to share cultural knowledge (e.g. stories, legends, games)

with EYPs, which can then be incorporated into ECEC activities. – are provided with resources to support their children’s linguistic

development at home (e.g. they use bilingual resources at home )– Take part in or observe ECEC activities in order to grasp a better

understanding of their child’s language acquisition processes in that context.

References1. Baker, C (2011): Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Multilingual Matters, Clevedon,

(England). 5th ed. 2. Bruner, J. (1983) Child’s Talk: Learning to Use Language, New York: Norton.3. Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language development in promoting educational success for

language minority students. In California State Department of Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: A theoretical framework. Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center, California State University, Los Angeles.

4. Griebel, W., Heinisch, R., Kieferle, C, Röbe, E. & Seifert, A. (Hrsg.) (2013). Übergang in die Schule und Mehrsprachigkeit – Ein Curriculum für pädagogische Fach- und Lehrkräfte/Transition to School and Multilingualism – A Curriculum for Educational Professionals. Hamburg: Dr. Kovac.

5. Lambert, W.E. (1987) The effects of bilingual and bicultural experiences on children's attitudes and social perspectives. In: Homel, P., Palij, M. & Aaronson, D. (eds.), Childhood bilingualism: Aspects of linguistic, cognitive and social development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 197-221.

6. Krashen, S. (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.7. Long, M. (1980). Input, interaction and second-language acquisition. In H. Winitz (ed.), Native Language

and Foreign Language Acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 379, 259-278.8. Mohanty, A. & Panda, M. ed. (2009). Social justice through multilingual education, 19-35. Multilingual

Matters.9. Siraj-Blatchford, I., Clarke, P. (first published 2000, reprinted 2011).Supporting Identity, Diversity and

Language in the Early years. Maidenhead: Open University Press.10. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge:

Harvard University Press.

Thank you very much for your attention!