English Proficiency Final Attainment Levels in
Dutch Primary Schools:
Eibo versus EarlyBird
Lesley Anne Goes – 3213854
Master Thesis, Utrecht University.
Supervisor: Rick de Graaff
August 2013
Format: APA
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
2
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
4
2. Theoretical Framework
8
2.1
Thesis question and hypothesis
8
2.2
Which differences can be found between late (Eibo) and early (Vvto)
9
learners?
2.3
Which differences, with respect to final attainment levels, can be
13
found between academic levels?
2.4
How are these differences in final attainment level reflected in the
14
tested linguistic skills (listening, reading and use of English)?
3. Method
20
3.1
Participants
21
3.2
Materials and Procedures
23
3.2.1 Listening
24
3.2.2 Reading
27
3.2.3 Use of English
29
4. Results
31
4.1
Scores of late (Eibo) and early (EarlyBird) learners
31
4.2
Scores per academic level and their relation to the Cito exam scores
33
4.3
Scores per linguistic skill
37
5. Discussion
47
5.1 Conclusion
47
5.2 Application of results
49
5.2.1 Ideal learning trajectory
49
5.2.2 Establishing final attainment levels
51
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
5.2.3 Suggestions
3
51
References
55
Appendix
58
Interne tussenrapportage Eindtermen Vvto
58
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
4
1. Introduction
This paper is one of six written by graduate students from the University Utrecht. It
analyses the data gathered during the research project conducted by EarlyBird, a Dutch centre
of expertise for early English in primary education1, and University Utrecht in cooperation
with Anglia European Network. Anglia “is an active network of 350 schools, colleges and
universities working together to stimulate and structure the learning and teaching of English”2
(Anglia, 2013). The study aims to test the EarlyBird curriculum and determine its
effectiveness on second language acquisition in primary education. This paper concerns the
differences in English proficiency levels between EarlyBird students, who receive English
instruction from group 1 to 8, and non-EarlyBird students, who receive English instruction in
group 7 and 8, at the end of primary school.
In the Netherlands, the law states that everyone has to attend school from age five to
age eighteen. Children start with eight years of primary school, i.e. group 1 to 8, and continue
to secondary school which lasts from four to six years. Primary and secondary school are free
of charge except for minor expenses, such as school supplies (Government of the Netherlands,
2013).
English has been a mandatory subject in Dutch primary schools since 1986, i.e. Eibo
(Engels in het basisonderwijs). At that time, introducing English into the curriculum was seen
as necessary. First, because English was quickly developing as a lingua franca. In addition,
changes were made concerning second language teaching policies at European level. Finally,
there was a growing need for people with a higher English proficiency level. Today, the latter
is seen as most important, because in order to participate in the international economy a
sufficient and adequate English proficiency level is necessary (Thijs et al, 2011). As a result,
English was made a mandatory subject in Dutch primary schools in order to increase the
1
2
For additional information see www.earlybirdie.nl
For additional information see www.anglianetwork.eu
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
5
students’ English proficiency level, and over time the Dutch population’s English proficiency
level. However, there is no law that obligates schools to introduce English into their
curriculum in a specific year. Schools are, therefore, free to decide when they offer English
lessons to their students (group 1 to 8). Consequently, three different types of curricula have
emerged:

Regulier Eibo: which offers English in group 7 and 8

Vervroegd Eibo: which offers English in group 5 to 8

Vvto (vroeg vreemdetalenonderwijs): which offers English from group 1 to 8
In 2012 there were around 7000 primary schools in the Netherlands (Ministerie voor
onderwijs, cultuur en wetenschap, 2013). According to EarlyBird (2013), from these 7000
schools approximately 800 are Vvto schools and about a quarter of these schools offer the
EarlyBird-curriculum.
The Vvto schools that participated in this project all offer the EarlyBird-curriculum.
EarlyBird “aims to introduce children to the English language in a responsible, authentic and
meaningful way which fosters a positive attitude to learning” (EarlyBird, 2011, p. 2). To
achieve this goal, they developed a curriculum which focuses on the three main strands in
EarlyBird teaching. First, teaching vocabulary provides the students with the building blocks
of the English language. Students are taught the meaning of and how to produce highfrequency words which “occur in all four areas of language: listening, speaking, reading and
writing” (EarlyBird, 2011, p. 11). Secondly, “EarlyBird recognises that people learn in
different ways: there are Multiple Intelligences (MI)” (EarlyBird, 2011, p. 13). By
incorporating exercises and activities with various levels of difficulty into lessons, the lessons
will appeal and provide a challenge to all students regardless of the differences in their
proficiency levels. Thirdly, digital learning environments are used to enhance and increase
learning possibilities by expanding the exposure to English from schoolbooks and the teacher
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
to native speakers that are accessible through videos and music via the internet or other
media. In addition, by incorporating games and other media centred activities students are
motivated to learn, because it is presented in an informal and fun way. As a result, EarlyBird
hopes to enhance and improve second language acquisition in primary schools and aims to
provide students with the tools to attain higher proficiency levels than the Eibo-curriculum
offers.
The curriculum (Government of the Netherlands, 2013) must include Dutch, English,
arithmetic and mathematics, sports and various types of social and environmental studies,
such as geography, history and science. “The government has set attainment targets
(kerndoelen) which define what students are expected to have acquired with respect to
knowledge, understanding and skills by the end of primary school. These targets aid with the
transition to secondary education. The attainment targets allow schools to use their own
teaching approach while still ensuring that children learn the requisite key skills”
(Government of the Netherlands, 2013). Official attainment targets have not been established
for English yet. However, there are roughly formulated attainment targets for English in
primary education which are used as guidelines. These attainment targets for English were
first established in 1993, simplified in 1998 and reformulated in 2006. As a result, the
following four attainment targets were formulated (Thijs et al., 2011):

Attainment target 13: Students learn to gather information from simple spoken and
written texts.

Attainment target 14: Students learn to ask for and give information on simple
subjects. In addition, they develop the confidence to express themselves in English.

Attainment target 15: Students learn the spelling of a few simple words about
everyday subjects.
6
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854

MA-thesis
7
Attainment target 16: Students learn how to look up descriptions and the spelling of
English words with the aid of a dictionary.
The goal is to provide the students with a foundation of the English language, which can be
further developed later in their academic careers (Thijs et al., 2011). Thijs et al. (2011) state
that these attainment targets are not practical, because there is no visible correlation between
different linguistic skills (such as listening, speaking, reading and writing), there is no
apparent link between these attainment targets and those for English in secondary school, and
the formulation of the attainment targets is too vague. For example, attainment target 13
mentions “simple spoken and written texts”, but there is no accompanying description of what
“simple” exactly entails. Similarly, attainment target 15 mentions “a few simple words”, but
does not specify how many “a few” are. Bodde-Alderlieste (2005) concludes that these
attainment targets do not provide clear rules or goals on which an English-curriculum for
primary education can be based.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
8
2. Theoretical Framework
2.1 Thesis question and hypothesis
This paper concerns the assessment of the final attainment levels of Dutch students at
the end of primary school, i.e. in group 8. The final attainment levels are the English
proficiency levels of the students. This may look like a straightforward task, but it entails
more than just a simple evaluation. First, although there are official final attainment levels
described for English at secondary schools, there are none for primary schools. In addition, a
differentiation of final attainment levels between late learners (Eibo students) and early
learners (Vvto students) does not exist either. Without clear final attainment levels for
primary schools, it becomes difficult to assess how proficient students exactly are in English
at the end of group 8. This paper will, therefore, try to shed a light on this matter by looking at
what these final attainment levels could be. The question that this paper tries to answer is:

How do students in primary education differ, with respect to English proficiency final
attainment levels, at the end of group 8?
It is relevant to ask whether students in primary education reach different English proficiency
final attainment levels at the end of group 8, because it gives insight into the effect of the
current English curricula for primary and secondary schools.
In order to answer this question, the possible influences which cause differences in
final attainment level must be studied first. If there are any differences in final attainment
levels, by specifying how great these differences are and why these differences occur may
provide a clearer picture of why students reach a specific final attainment level. This paper
will, therefore, also look at the following three additional sub-questions:

Which differences can be found between late (Eibo) and early (Vvto) learners?

Which differences, with respect to final attainment level, can be found between
academic levels, i.e. the levels indicating students’ academic proficiency?
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854

MA-thesis
9
How are these differences in final attainment level reflected in the tested
linguistic skills (listening, reading and use of English)?
By answering all four questions, it may become clearer if there is a difference in students’
English proficiency at the end of primary school.
2.2 Which differences can be found between late (Eibo) and early (Vvto)
learners?
Students participating in the Vvto-curriculum (in this study the EarlyBird-curriculum)
are called early learners, because they receive English instruction from group 1 to 8. Students
participating in the Eibo-curriculum are called late learners, because they receive English
instruction in group 7 and 8. There reasons why early learners may reach higher final
attainment levels than late learners are twofold. On the one hand, it is a matter of quantity.
Early learners may reach a higher proficiency level than late learners, because they receive six
years of English instruction more. This means that early learners receive English from age 4
or 5, while late learners do not receive English instruction until age 10 or 11. On the other
hand, the reason is age related. The age related theory is based on the critical age hypothesis,
which is described as “[the] time between early childhood and puberty during which a child
can acquire language easily, swiftly, and without external intervention. After this period, the
acquisition of the grammar is difficult and, for some individuals, never fully achieved”
(Fromkin, 2007, p. 542). The theory of the existence of a critical period for a first language or
native language (L1), was first introduced by Penfield and Roberts (1959) and associated with
second language (L2) acquisition by Lenneberg (1967). A possible cause for the critical age
hypothesis could be the loss of the brain’s plasticity when humans are approximately 9 years
old (Penfield and Roberts, 1959). The loss of this plasticity is seen as the reason why L2
acquisition becomes harder as humans grow older. If this theory is true, the loss of the brain’s
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
10
plasticity at age 9 contributes to the hypothesis that early learners reach a higher final
attainment level than late learners, because early learners receive English instruction before
age 9 and late learners not until they are older.
However, to which extent a critical period affects L2 acquisition is still under debate,
because language acquisition entails more than just exposure to a target language during a
critical period. Learning rate, i.e. the speed with which the L2 is acquired, is another
important factor. The goal of early English in Dutch primary schools is to offer students the
tools to build a foundation for English which can be improved and expanded later in their
academic careers (Thijs et al., 2011). In other words, hypothetically, the earlier the start, the
better the English proficiency. However, Muñoz (2006) shows that the L2 learning rate of late
learners (older than 9 such as adolescents and adults) is faster and more efficient than that of
early learners. Similarly, Snow and Hoefnagel-Höhle (1977, 1978) “found that adults and
adolescents were better than children in terms of what they could learn in a 25-minute
instruction session up to a year of naturalistic exposure to L2 Dutch. Although the advantage
began diminishing after ten months or so, the findings were surprising because they flatly
contradicted assumed critical period effects” (as cited in Ortega, 2009, p.16). A possible
reason for this temporary rate advantage is the fact that although adolescents and adults have
lost the brain’s plasticity, and therefore have lost the ability of L2 acquisition through
informal instruction and exposure, their brain compensates for this loss with other cognitive
systems that have developed after age 9. This enables adults to learn faster and more
efficiently when the L2 instruction involves metalinguistic skills, such as formal grammar
instruction, but not if it involves informal exposure. However, research shows that the rate
advantage is temporary. Snow and Hoefnagel-Höhle (1977, 1978) already indicated that the
rate advantage began diminishing after ten months. In addition, in five long-term studies
conducted at Harvard University and New York University by Oyama (1976) and Patkowski
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
11
(1980) L2 proficiency tests were conducted on subjects who resided in the L2 environment
for at least five years. They found that early L2 learners had a higher proficiency level than
adolescent and adult L2 learners. Similarly, “Long (1990) reassessed the evidence on rate and
ultimate attainment a decade later and reiterated the same conclusion, arguing that the rate
advantage for adults dissipates after a little more than a year, because children eventually
always catch up and surpass late starters” (as cited in Ortega, 2009, p. 17).
Although Snow and Hoefnagel-Höhle describe the rate advantage of adolescents and
adults, this group could also include the late learners, i.e. Eibo students, if the criteria for
defining early and late learners is based on the change in the brain’s plasticity at
approximately age 9. Therefore, everyone before age 9 are early learners and possess the
ability of L2 acquisition through informal exposure, while everyone after age 9 are late
learners who may have lost the ability of L2 acquisition through informal exposure because of
the loss of the brain’s plasticity. The hypothesis is that because English is mainly taught
through informal instruction in Dutch primary schools, early learners (Vvto) are better
capable of acquiring English in this manner than late learners (Eibo), because the loss, or the
gradual loss, of the brain’s plasticity makes it more difficult for late learners to acquire
English through informal instruction in primary schools.
As stated earlier, the goal of early English is to provide the students with a foundation
of the English language, which can be further developed later in their academic careers (Thijs
et al., 2011). The opinions differ on how this foundation is best laid. Research shows that the
difference between informal and formal instruction may influence how high the English
proficiency final attainment level is. Muñoz (2006) argues that “when early starters studying
English from the age of 8 to 19 were compared to late starters studying English from the age
of 11 to 17, the late starters actually maintained an advantage that persisted well after five
years of instruction. ... [Younger] starters do not appear to catch up in these foreign language
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
12
contexts, where the L2 is only available through instruction” (as cited in Ortega, 2009, p. 17).
Muñoz distinguishes here between traditional formal instruction, which focuses on
metalinguistic skills such as grammar, and informal exposure, which focuses on acquiring a
language through interaction. It seems that because late learners possess more advanced
metalinguistic skills than early learners, traditional formal instruction is a more effective
teaching method for late learners than early learners. Formal instruction does not provide
early learners with a higher final attainment level than late learners. But when early learners
are exposed to the target language through informal exposure, such as a submersion setting in
which the learner is living in a target language environment, does it lead to early learners
catching up and surpassing late learners. As a result, hypothetically the best way to a higher
final attainment level is through the use of both ways, i.e. relatively more informal exposure
when the learner is under 9 years old and then add relatively more formal instruction when the
learner is older. Informal exposure before age 9 provides a foundation which can be improved
by formal instruction after age 9.
In conclusion, early learners may reach higher final attainment levels, because Vvto
provides English instruction from group 1 to 8 (from age 4 or 5), whereas Eibo provides
English instruction from age 10 or 11. As a result, early learners receive English instruction
during the age when the brain has not lost its plasticity yet, which might make them more
capable to acquire a L2 through informal exposure (which is the only method with which
English is instructed at primary schools) than late learners whose brain’s plasticity is lost or
are in the process of gradually losing it. In addition, Vvto provides six years of English
instruction more than Eibo. However, the amount of exposure is limited. According to Thijs et
al. (2011), Eibo students receive approximately 1 hour of English instruction per week in
group 7 and 8. The Vvto students receive up to approximately 4 hours a week (but in many
cases only 1 hour a week) depending on which Vvto-curiculum is used in group 1 to 8.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
13
Although the amount of English instruction Vvto students receive is greater than that of the
Eibo students, a maximum of just under 4 hours a week of informal English instruction versus
approximately 1 hour a week, is a very different learning environment than a submersion
setting in which a child is living in the target language environment. As a result, the informal
instruction students receive in primary education may create an entirely different effect on L2
acquisition than would occur when the L2 acquisition takes place in a submersion setting.
Consequently, Vvto might not produce similar results as a submersion setting, which might
also influence the difference in final attainment levels between Vvto and Eibo students.
2.3 Which differences, with respect to final attainment level, can be found
between academic levels?
At the end of group 8 all students take an obligatory assessment test, i.e. the Cito
exam, which indicates their current general academic level for Dutch and maths. English is
not included in the Cito exam. The results of the Cito exam lead to the classification of the
student into academic categories. The classification by Cito is not definite. Instead, the Cito
exam results are supportive for the classification given by the primary schools. Primary
schools determine the definite classification of students into academic categories. (Lubbe &
Hollenberg, 2011). There are four types of secondary education in the Netherlands
(Government of the Netherlands, 2013):

practical training (Pro or Lwoo)

pre-vocational secondary education (Vmbo)

general secondary education (Havo)

pre-university education (Vwo)
Many secondary schools offer mixed level classes, such as Havo/Vwo. These mixed levels are
also used to analyse data in this study.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
14
It is relevant to ask if there is a difference in English proficiency levels between
academic levels, because the academic levels may serve as a predictor of the attained
proficiency levels. This could mean, for example, that a Vmbo-student would reach a lower
proficiency level than a Vwo-student. Lightbrown and Spada (2006) indicate that “a link
between intelligence and second language learning has sometimes been reported” (p. 57).
They elaborate that research shows that IQ tests appear to be good indicators of predicting the
attainment levels in L2 acquisition. The Cito exam might provide similar results as an IQ test,
but instead of assessing a student’s IQ it measures their general academic school
achievements. From this perspective the Cito exam could be a good predictor of final
attainment levels. However, Genesee (1976) “suggests that the kind of ability measured by
traditional IQ tests may be a strong predictor when it comes to learning that involves language
analysis and rule learning. This kind of ‘intelligence’ may play a less important role in
classrooms where the instruction focuses more on communication and interaction” (as cited in
Lightbrown and Spada, 2006, p. 57). This would suggest that when English is taught with less
formal instruction, such as grammar lessons, but through informal exposure and interaction,
the Cito exam is not a reliable predictor. Consequently, in order to determine if the Cito exam
could be used as a predictor of final attainment levels, the relationship between Cito exam
scores and final attainment levels must be analysed.
2.4 How are these differences in final attainment level reflected in the tested
linguistic skills (listening, reading and use of English)?
This paper focuses on the results of the Listening, Reading and Use of English exams.
The Use of English exam tests some aspects of the grammatical knowledge of the students. It
is relevant to look at the results of these different linguistic skills and compare them, because
they may provide information on the way students acquire different linguistic skills and if one
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
15
skill is acquired more easily than the other. Research shows that there can be a difference
between attainment levels for different academic skills, such as listening and reading. “[In] a
study with students in French immersion programmes in Canada, Genesee (1976) found that,
while intelligence was related to the development of French second language reading,
grammar, and vocabulary, it was unrelated to oral production skills3” (as cited in Lightbrown
& Spada, 2006, p. 57). This suggests that students’ oral attainment level, i.e. speaking and
listening, is acquired through different cognitive systems in the brain than reading and
grammar. As a result, this may lead to different final attainment levels for listening on the one
hand, and reading and grammar on the other hand. Saville-Troike (2012) distinguishes four
areas of activity involving language: reading, writing, listening and speaking. “While all four
areas of communicative activity draw on an overlapping pool of L2 knowledge at different
language levels, they are independent to some extent” (Saville-Troike, 2012, p. 145).
Receptive activities (reading and listening) involve both bottom-up and top down processing.
Bottom-down processing requires prior knowledge of the L2, such as vocabulary and
phonology. “At the early stages of learning, bottom-up processing is limited to visual or
auditory recognition of the limited set of words and word combinations that have been
acquired thus far. Top-down processing can compensate for linguistic limitations to some
extend by allowing learners to guess the meaning of the words they have not encountered
before, and to make some sense out of larger chunks of written and oral text” (Saville-Troike,
2012, p. 145). Both listening and reading require prerequisite knowledge (Grabe 2002):

Large recognition vocabulary of both basic and subject-specific terms, including their
meaning, graphic representation, and probability of occurrence with other lexical
items
3
Oral production skills were tested during the speaking exams. Its analyses can be found in the thesis of Ruth de
Haan, a fellow graduate student at University Utrecht, who is one of the other 5 students participating in this
study.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854

MA-thesis
16
Complex sentence structures, along with punctuation conventions that contribute to
syntactic processing.

Organization features at the sentence level which identify elements that are in focus
and distinguish old and new information.
What distinguishes acquisition between listening and reading is an additional fourth
prerequisite knowledge that differs per linguistic skill.
Listening needs the “ability to process pronunciation by speakers of a different native
and non-native varieties of the language, which can be especially challenging for L2 learners”
(Saville-Troike, 2012, p. 171). Flege’s equivalence classification (1987) provides an insight
into how L2 learners perceive the target language. “Equivalence classification is a basic
cognitive mechanism which permits humans to perceive constant categories in the face of
inherent sensory variability found in many physical exemplars which may instantiate a
category” (Flege, 1987, p. 49). The L1 phonemes a child learns become the benchmark with
which foreign L2 phonemes are categorised. This mechanism helps or limits, a student’s
interpretation of a sound. As a result, a word may be misunderstood or not recognised
resulting in miscomprehension. The prerequisite knowledge of vocabulary, sentence
structures and organization features at sentence level combined with the degree of how well
students can interpret these phonemes into words and then to link them to the meaning of the
word, could vary and may potentially lead to different final attainment levels for listening.
The additional fourth prerequisite knowledge for reading (Grabe 2002) are the
“organisation features at the discourse level, such as how texts are structured and how
information is organised” (as cited in Ortega, 2012, p.168). Reading strategies (Kwakernaak,
2009), such as skimming, aid students with interpreting the presented text more efficiently.
The prerequisite knowledge of vocabulary, sentence structures and organization features at
sentence level combined with the degree of how well students can apply reading strategies to
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
17
the presented text, could vary and may potentially lead to different final attainment levels for
reading.
As established earlier, students in primary education receive English instruction
mainly through informal exposure. This means that there is no formal instruction, such as
grammar lessons. Consequently, by looking at what kind of grammatical knowledge is
required to answer the exam questions correctly, the result of the Use of English exam will
provide an insight into how much grammatical knowledge students acquire and are able to
distinguish through informal instruction.
Although there are no official English proficiency final attainment levels described for
primary schools, there are hypotheses about what these levels should be like and which
proficiency level should be attained per linguistic skill at the end of primary school. One of
these hypotheses has been stated by the European Platform, a Dutch organisation whose goal
is “that all pupils in primary and secondary education receive a foundation based on
internationalisation, in order to inspire and prepare them to study, work and live in an
international environment” (2013). In addition, the European Platform provides support to
schools wanting to establish internationalisation as an extra distinguishing aspect of their
school. The European Platform also encourages the internationalisation of teacher training
institutions for primary and secondary education in the Netherlands”. (European Platform,
2013). The European Platform (2011) hypothesise that students do reach different final
attainment levels at the end of group 8 and argue that there are three factors that determine
which final attainment level a student reaches:
 The difference in time that is dedicated to English instruction
 The difficulty in measuring how much time each school spends at English instruction
 The quality of the programme itself
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
18
Concluding, the European Platform suggests that it might be possible to use the existing goals
for the second year of secondary education as the goals for Vvto students. Table 1shows the
proficiency level per academic level, while Table 2 shows the accompanying description per
proficiency level and per linguistic skill4.
As the European Platform assumes that Vvto students reach a higher proficiency level
than Eibo students at the end of primary school, Vvto students should be able to attain the
proficiency levels which Eibo students reach after two years of formal instruction at
secondary education (European Platform, 2011). This theory could provide a basis for the
English proficiency final attainment goals, because it incorporates existing CEFR descriptions
at a variety of different proficiency levels.
Suggested final attainment levels for Vvto by CEFR
Vmbo
Havo
Vwo
Listening
A1
A2
A2/B1
Reading
A1
A2
A2
Table 1: Suggested final attainment levels for Vvto by CEFR
4
Table 1 and 2 are based on CEFR (Council of Europe, 2001).
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
19
CEFR descriptions of final attainment levels
A1
A2
B1
Listening
I can recognise familiar
words and very basic
phrases concerning
myself, my family and
immediate concrete
surroundings when
people speak slowly and
clearly.
I can understand phrases
and the highest frequency
vocabulary related to
areas of most immediate
personal relevance (e.g.
very basic personal and
family information,
shopping, local area,
employment). I can catch
the main point in short
clear, simple messages
and announcements.
Reading
I can understand familiar
names, words and very
simple sentences, for
example on notices and
posters or in catalogues.
I can read very short,
simple texts. I can find
specific, predictable
information in simple
everyday material such as
advertisements,
prospectors, menus and
timetables and I can
understand short simple
personal letters.
I can understand the main
points of clear standard
speech on familiar
matters regularly
encountered in work,
school leisure, etc. I can
understand the main point
of many radio or TV
programmes on current
affairs or topics of
personal or professional
interest when the delivery
is relatively slow and
clear.
I can understand texts
that consist mainly of
high frequency everyday
or job-related language. I
can understand the
description of events,
feelings and wishes in
personal letters.
Table 2: CEFR descriptions of final attainment levels
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
20
3. Method
The overall goal of this research project was to test the quality of the EarlyBird
programme and determine its effectiveness on second language acquisition in primary
education. To determine the programme’s effectiveness, EarlyBird and Eibo students were
given a series of proficiency tests to estimate their English proficiency levels. All students
were given the same exams: Listening, Reading, Use of English, Dictation and Speaking.
This paper focused on the scores on the Listening, Reading and Use of English exams
of the group 8 students. Use of English tested basic contextualised grammatical and
vocabulary knowledge. Because English grammar was not explicitly taught in primary
education, these scores may provide an insight into how much grammar students learn
through informal instruction.
In order to determine if students reached different final attainment levels at the end of
group 8, the following steps were taken:
1.
Indicate which proficiency levels were tested with the Listening,
Reading and Use of English exams. (Method)
2.
Determine the scores for the Listening, Reading and Use of English exams per
Academic level for Eibo, EarlyBird and all students. (Results)
3.
Determine which proficiency level (Anglia and CEFR) students attained for
listening reading and use of English. (Results)
4.
Discuss if the attained proficiency levels meet the acquirements of the
suggested CEFR levels for Vvto. (Discussion)
5.
Discuss the significance of these results and how can we use/incorporate them
to improve English curricula at primary school. (Discussion)
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
21
3.1 Participants
All group 8 students that were tested are enrolled in a primary school using either the
Eibo or EarlyBird curriculum. In total, 19 primary schools participated in this project. From
the 9 Eibo schools 292 students were tested, from which 153 were male and 139 were female.
From the 10 EarlyBird schools 301 students were tested, from which 140 were male and 161
were female. Students that were sick on the day the exams were conducted, and therefore
could not provide any data, were excluded. All other participants, including those with
learning disabilities, such as dyslexia, but also students with other native languages than
Dutch were included in the results to provide a more complete picture of the final attainment
that are reached. The exact participant distribution per school can be found in Table 3.
Participants, group 8
Eibo/
EarlyBird
School
City
Group
Eibo
Eibo
Eibo
Eibo
Eibo
Eibo
Eibo
Tandem
Driespan
Bron
Kralingse School
Tandem
Schelf
Wereldkidz Mozaiek
Zwijndrecht
Puttershoek
Delft
Rotterdam
Oud Beijerland
‘s-Gravendeel
Veenendaal
Eibo
Eibo
Toermalijn
Dubbeldekker
Zwijndrecht
Numansdorp
8
8
8
8
8
8A
8A Ronde Erf
8A Petenbos
8B Petenbos
8
7/85
8
EarlyBird
EarlyBird
EarlyBird
EarlyBird
EarlyBird
Bergse Zonnebloem
Takkenbosse
Blieken
Clipper
Jacob Maris
Rotterdam
Numansdorp
Klaaswaal
Rotterdam
Rotterdam
EarlyBird
EarlyBird
EarlyBird
Eduard van Beinum
Passe Partout
Zevensprong
Rotterdam
Rotterdam
Oud-Beijerland
EarlyBird
EarlyBird
Boomgaard
Klinker
Mijnsheerenland
Oud-Beijerland
Total
Table 3: Participants, group 8
5
8
8
8
8
BBA 8
BBB 8
8
8A
8 Centrum
8 Noord
8
8A
8B
Male
Female
Total
153
17
18
17
15
10
9
10
16
7
16
4
14
140
13
18
10
9
9
3
11
13
11
4
16
11
12
293
139
17
19
13
13
15
13
5
7
4
15
5
13
161
11
12
9
22
5
8
18
18
13
8
10
14
13
300
292
34
37
30
28
25
22
15
23
11
31
9
27
301
24
30
19
31
14
11
29
31
24
12
26
25
25
593
This class consisted of Group 7 and Group 8 students. Only group 8 students were tested. Their data is shown
in the table.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
22
All participating students received their own registration number to ensure their
privacy. Scores were linked to this registration number so their data could be analysed. All
parents were informed about this study and parental consent was asked and obtained for their
children’s participation in the study. Parental consent was not properly obtained in one
school; therefore only 9 Eibo-schools instead of 10 were included in the study.
The exact academic levels which were used in this study can be found in Table 4.
Academic levels
Academic level
Description
Lwoo
Vmbo with extra guidance
Vmbo-b
Basic pre-vocational programme
Vmbo-k
Middle-management pre-vocational programme
Vmbo-gl
Combined pre-vocational programme
Vmbo-tl
Theoretical pre-vocational programme
Vmbo-tl/Havo
Combination of the theoretical pre-vocational programme and the general secondary
education
Havo
General secondary education
Havo/Vwo
Combination of the general secondary education and the pre-university education
Vwo
Pre-university education
Table 4: Academic levels
3.2 Materials and procedure
To minimize the chance of creating unforeseen variables resulting from conducting the
exams in different ways at different schools, a manual was designed and distributed amongst
the examiners and the schools. Each manual contained the order in which the exams needed to
be conducted and explicit guidelines for the explanation given to the students of how they
should proceed during the examination. All tests were administered by University Utrecht
graduate students as trained examiners. The exams were conducted in the following order:

Listening
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis

Reading

Use of English

Dictation

Speaking exam (in randomly selected pairs)
23
Students were allowed to ask questions during the examination. The examiners kept records
of the questions asked and answers given.
The proficiency exams were created by EarlyBird and Anglia Examinations England
in collaboration with University Utrecht. Anglia (2009) “has specialised in ESOL (English for
Speakers of Other Languages) assessments for 15 years ... [and] offers a comprehensive and
structured programme of assessing English language competence, from beginner through to
native speaker level in over 8 countries worldwide” (p.2). The Anglia levels range from First
Step to Masters. A diagram of all Anglia proficiency levels can be found in Figure 1. The
proficiency tests contained exercises which related to different proficiency levels. The
proficiency tests were created by combining different exercises from existing Anglia exams.
The Anglia exams that were used each contained exercises for only one proficiency level. By
creating an exam which tested different proficiency levels instead of one, students’
proficiency levels could be estimated with the results from one exam instead of several exams
each containing exercises testing only one proficiency level. However, this new exam format
might have influenced the effectiveness of the exercises, because they were no longer in their
original context.
After the first exams were developed by Anglia and EarlyBird, they were tested during
a trial. In the trial two EarlyBird schools and one Eibo school participated. From these results
the reliability of the exams was estimated. In addition, notes were made of any problems that
occurred during the examination, such as unclear questions or instructions, but also during the
marking of the trial exams. The tests’ reliability was analysed and all problems were
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
24
addressed. As a result, modified versions of the exams were created. These modified version
became the exams that were used to test the quality and determine the effectiveness of the
EarlyBird programme. The reliability of the final test versions ranged between .82 and .89.
Figure 1: Anglia levels
The final tests were administered, collected and graded by the examiners. The results
were processed in Excel and then analysed with SPSS. Multilevel-analyses were used to
distinguish effects at school level and individual level. The data presented in this paper was
based on those analyses.
3.2.1 Listening
The first test was the Listening exam. Before the exam started, the examiner explained
that the exam was 45 minutes long and consisted of 54 questions divided over 5 different
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
25
listening exercises. The exercises all consisted of a dialogue or story which was recorded on a
CD. The students listened to the CD and tried to answer the corresponding questions on the
answer sheet. Each dialogue and story was repeated twice so if students missed the answer the
first time they got a second chance. They were also instructed to read the questions before the
exercise started and were given time to do so.
Part 1 contained exercises that aimed at testing different proficiency levels. Part 2 to 5
gradually increased in difficulty, Part 2 was the easiest exercise while Part 5 was the most
difficult exercise. For each part the estimated proficiency level and type of questions
accompanying the recited text will be given to check if the estimated level was accounted for.
An overview of the proficiency levels per question, as based on the Anglia tests from which
the original exercises were taken, can be found in Table 5.
Listening, group 8
Anglia proficiency level per question
Anglia
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Junior
1, 2
Primary
3, 4
Preliminary
5, 6
14-19
Elementary
7, 8
Pre-intermediate
9, 10
Intermediate
11-13
20-26
27-33
Advanced
Proficiency
34-39
40-45
Table 5: Listening – Anglia proficiency level per question
Part 5
46-54
Total
per prof. level
2
2
8
2
2
17
21
Anglia and EarlyBird estimated the proficiency levels of Part 1 from Junior to
Intermediate and were divided over 13 items. All items were multiple-choice questions in
which the student were required to choose the correct picture out of four. Item 1 and 2 were at
Junior level. The recording provided only singular words, which was consistent with this
proficiency level (Anglia, 2009). Item 3 and 4 were at Primary level. The recording provided
only one sentence, which was consistent with this proficiency level (Anglia, 2009). Item 5 and
6 are at Preliminary level. “There are distracters in the conversation, but the answer is stated
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
26
explicitly at some point” (Anglia, 2009, p. 58). Item 7 and 8 were at Elementary level. The
criteria for Preliminary level applied here as well (Anglia, 2009). The difference in
proficiency level was determined by the amount of text presented in the recording. Item 9 and
10 were at Pre-Intermediate level. “There [were] distracters in the conversation and the
answer [was] not always stated explicitly” (Anglia, 2009, p. 59). Item 11 to 13 were at
Intermediate level. The criteria for Pre-Intermediate level applied here as well (Anglia, 2009).
The difference in proficiency level was determined by the amount of text presented in the
recording.
Part 2 consisted of two exercises. The proficiency level of the first exercise was at
Preliminary and the second exercise was at Intermediate. Exercise one consisted of 6
questions, whereas exercise two consisted of 7 questions. Both exercises consisted of gapfillers, i.e. a text in which some of the words are omitted. The possible answers for exercise
one were presented whereas they were not presented for exercise two. This difference
distinguished an exercise at Preliminary and Intermediate level (Anglia, 2009).
Part 3 consisted of two exercises. The proficiency level of the first exercise was at
Intermediate and the second exercise was at Proficiency. Exercise one consisted of 7 items,
whereas exercise two consisted of 6 items. Both exercises consisted of true or false questions.
The difference between both exercises was determined by the amount of recited text. Anglia
(2009) indicated that a true or false exercise Intermediate level needed a text which contained
distracters and in which the answer was not always stated explicitly.
The estimated proficiency level of Part 4 was at Proficiency. It consisted of 6 items
and all questions were multiple choice. Anglia (2009) indicated that a multiple choice
exercise at Proficiency level needed a text in which the answers appeared in the correct order.
The estimated proficiency level of Part 5 was at Proficiency. It consisted of 9 items
and all questions were multiple choice. This exercise differed from Part 4, because students
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
27
had choose the answer that was most appropriate to the presented question instead of listening
for the correct information. Anglia (2009) indicated that in this type of multiple choice
exercise at Proficiency level “[the] candidate chooses the correct reply to a question or
statement” (p. 61).
3.2.2 Reading
The second test was the Reading exam. Before the exam started, the examiner
explained that the exam was 45 minutes long and consisted of 48 questions divided over 6
different reading exercises. Part 1 to 6 consisted of an article with accompanying questions.
All six articles concerned familiar topics, such as whales (Part 1), the largest school in the
world (Part 2), a spider bite (Part 4) and turtles (part 5), and some with a curious twist, such as
a dog surfing contests (Part 3) and a metal eating man (Part 6). What all texts had in common
were that all topics were familiar and interesting to the target audience (primary school
students). The students read the article and tried to answer the corresponding questions on the
answer sheet. All answers were in multiple choice format. If a student was unable to finish the
exam within 45 minutes, he or she was instructed to underline the last question answered. All
questions after this line were considered missing data.
The exercises increased in difficulty, Part 1 was the easiest exercise while Part 6 was
the most difficult exercise. Anglia based the proficiency levels for reading on the amount of
words in the text and the type of questions accompanying it. For each part the estimated
proficiency level will be given and compared to the amount of words in the text and type of
questions accompanying the text to check if the estimated level was accounted for. An
overview of the proficiency level per question, as based on the Anglia tests from which the
original exercises were taken, can be found in Table 6.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
28
Reading, group 8
Anglia proficiency level per question
Anglia
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Elementary
1-8
9-16
Pre-intermediate
17-24
Intermediate
25-32
Advanced
Table 6: Reading – Anglia proficiency level per question
Part 5
33-40
-
Part 6
41-48
Total
Per prof. level
16
8
16
8
The proficiency level of Part 1 and 2 were both at Elementary. The text in Part 1
consisted of 214 words and the 8 accompanying questions were divided in 3 true or false
questions and 5 multiple choice questions. The text in Part 2 consisted of 208 words and the 8
accompanying questions were divided in 3 true or false questions and 5 multiple choice
questions. Anglia (2009) indicated that a text at Elementary level consisted of 190 to 210
words and had to be accompanied by either comprehension, true or false and multiple choice
questions.
The proficiency level of Part 3, 4 and 5 was at Intermediate. The text in Part 3
consisted of 310 words, in Part 4 of 292 words and in Part 5 of 316 words. In all three parts
the 8 accompanying questions were divided in 2 true or false questions and 6 multiple choice
questions. Anglia (2009) indicated that an exercise at Intermediate level needed a text
consisting of 290 to 310 words and had to be accompanied by either true or false and multiple
choice questions. In addition, “[the] text will be of different genres and have varying layouts
e.g. newspaper articles will be set out as they would be in a newspaper and information about
the natural world will be set out as it would be in an encyclopaedia” (Anglia, 2009, p. 40).
The proficiency level of Part 6 was at Advanced. The text in Part 6 consisted of 349
words and the 8 accompanying questions were divided in 2 true or false questions and 6
multiple choice questions. Anglia (2009) indicated that an exercise at Advanced level required
a text consisting of 340 to 360 words and had to be accompanied by true or false and multiple
choice questions. In addition, the subject of the texts could be fiction or non-fiction.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
29
3.2.3 Use of English
The third test was the Use of English exam. Before the exam started, the examiner
explained that the exam would last up to 30 minutes and consisted of 58 questions divided
over 8 different parts. If a student was unable to finish the exam within 30 minutes, he or she
was instructed to underline the last question answered. All questions after this line were
considered missing data. An overview of the proficiency level per question, as based on the
Anglia tests from which the original exercises were taken, can be found in Table 7.
Use of English, group 8
Anglia proficiency level per question
Anglia
Part
1
Part
2
Part
3
Part
4
Part
5
Part
6
Part
7
Part
8
Total per
prof. level
Primary
1-6
7-13
14-18 19-33 Preliminary
Elementary
19-33 34-38
Pre-intermediate
Intermediate
Table 7: Use of English – Anglia proficiency level per question
39-43
-
44-48
-
49-58
-
The proficiency level of Part 1 and 2 were both at Primary. Part 1 consisted of
exercises in which the students were given a word in a sentence and had to choose the
opposite of that word. Part 2 consisted of the same type of exercise, however here the students
had to choose a synonym. Anglia (2009) indicated that this type of exercise was consistent
with the requirements of an exercise at Primary level.
The proficiency level of Part 3 was at Primary. Part 3 was an exercise in which the
students were presented with a sentence that was broken down into several groups of words.
The students had to construct a grammatically correct sentence from these pieces. Anglia
(2009) indicated that this type of exercise was consistent with the requirements of an exercise
at Primary level.
The proficiency level of Part 4 was at Primary and Elementary level. Part 4 was a gapfiller exercise with multiple-choice answers and consisted of 15 items. Each item consisted of
a sentence in which one word was omitted. Four possible answers were given. Different
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
30
grammatical items were tested, including prepositions, personal pronouns and tenses. The
grammatical item determined the proficiency level of that question. Anglia (2009) indicated
that the tested items were consistent with the requirements of an exercise at Primary and
Elementary level.
The proficiency level of Part 5 was at Elementary. Part 5 consisted of 5 items in which
the students were presented with a sentence that was broken down into singular words. The
students had to construct a grammatically correct sentence from these pieces. Anglia (2009)
indicated that this type of exercise was consistent with the requirements of an exercise at
Elementary level.
The proficiency level of Part 6 was at Pre-intermediate. Part 6 consisted of 5 items in
which the students were presented with a correct grammatical sentence and had to place an
adverb in the correct place in the sentence. Anglia (2009) indicated that this type of
exercise was consistent with the requirements of an exercise at Pre-intermediate level.
The proficiency level of Part 7 was at Pre-intermediate. Part 7 was a gap-filler exercise
with multiple-choice answers and consisted of 5 items in which the students were required to
choose between a noun, adjective or adverb. The items tested in this exercise were
specifically chosen for testing this proficiency level6. Anglia (2009) indicated that this type of
exercise was consistent with the requirements of an exercise at Pre-intermediate level.
The proficiency level of Part 8 was at Intermediate. Part 8 was a gap-filler exercise
with multiple-choice answers and consisted of 10. Anglia (2009) indicated that in this type of
exercise “[structures] from Elementary, Pre-Intermediate and Intermediate structure lists
[were] tested” and was therefore consistent with the requirements of an exercise at
Intermediate level.
6
See Anglia’s Handbook for Teachers page 35 for the model of this exercise.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
4
MA-thesis
31
Results
4.1 Scores of late (Eibo) and early (EarlyBird) learners
The analysis of the scores of the students on the proficiency exams revealed that the
Eibo students scored lower than the EarlyBird students on the Listening, Reading and Use of
English exam (Table 8). The average of the Eibo students on the listening exam was .78 (SD
= .13), while the EarlyBird students scored an average of .83 (SD = .11). On the reading exam
the average of the Eibo students was .61 (SD = .16), while the EarlyBird students scored an
average of .67 (SD = .16). The average of the Eibo students on the use of English exam was
.60 (SD = .15), while the EarlyBird students scored an average of .68 (SD = .15).
Average test scores Eibo and EarlyBird per linguistic skill
Eibo
Mean
Std.
EarlyBird
Mean
Std.
Listening
0,78
0,13
0,83
0,11
Reading
0,61
0,16
0,67
0,16
Use of English
0,60
0,15
0,68
0,15
Table 8: Average test scores Eibo and EarlyBird per linguistic skill
Multilevel analyses (Table 9) revealed significant main effects on the test results for test part
(F=22.876; p<.001), Cito scores (F=210.666; p<.001) and Eibo/EarlyBird (F=13.374;
p=.001). The results of the test part showed that students scored higher on some test parts than
on others. The Cito results indicated that there was a relation between the Cito scores and test
scores. The higher the score on the Cito exam, the higher the scores on the proficiency exams.
The Vvto variables showed that the EarlyBird students scored higher on the proficiency
exams than the Eibo students, which is supported by the results in Table 8. In addition, there
was an interaction effect (Table 9) between test part and Cito (F=20.102; p<.001) and
between test part and Vvto (F=7.560; p<.001). This indicated that the effect of Cito was
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
32
greater on some test parts than on others and that the effect of Vvto was greater on some test
parts than on others.
Effects on test scores
Test
F
22,876
p
0,000
Cito
210,666
0,000
Vvto
13,374
0,001
Test Cito
20,102
0,000
Test Vvto
7,560
0,000
Table 9: Effects on test scores
There was also a significant interaction effect between test parts (Table 10) and Vvto on
Listening (t = -2.88, p < .001), Reading (t = -2,70, p < .0001), and Use of English (t = -5.32, p
< .001). These results indicated that on all three exams EarlyBird students scored higher than
the Eibo students, especially on the Use of English exam. This was illustrated by the average
scores in Table 8 where the difference in score was also the greatest on the Use of English
exam. The average scores per academic level of the Eibo and EarlyBird students per linguistic
skill are illustrated in Table 11, 12 and 13 respectively. EarlyBird students scored higher than
Eibo students when their scores were compared per academic level. In addition, post-hoc
analyses illustrated that differences between EarlyBird and Eibo students were greatest on the
Use of English test. In sum, EarlyBird students scored, on average, higher than Eibo students
at each linguistic skill (Listening, Reading and Use of English) and per academic level.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
33
Differential effects of test part on +/- Vvto
Listening * Vvto
t
-2,884
p
0,004
Reading * Vvto
-2,695
0,007
Use of English * Vvto
-5,322
0,000
Table 10: Differential effects on test parts and Vvto
4.2 Scores per academic levels and their relation to the Cito exam scores
The difference between the scores per academic level are illustrated in Table 11, 12
and 13 for Listening, Reading and Use of English respectively. The listed academic levels are
based on Table 4. Table 11, 12 and 13 are structured similarly. The first column in each table
indicates the academic levels which are based on the Cito exam scores of the participating
students. These levels are ordered from the lowest (Lwoo) to the highest academic level
(Vwo) in this study. Each three columns for Eibo and EarlyBird. The mean indicates the
average number of correct answers on the Listening, Reading and Use of English exam
respectively. Consequently, in Table 11, which shows the scores for the listening exam, the
maximum of the mean is 54. In Table 12, which shows the scores for the reading exam, the
maximum of the mean is 48. And in Table 13, which shows the scores for the use of English
exam, the maximum of the mean is 58. The standard deviation illustrates how much the scores
of the students deviate from average. The higher the figure, the greater is the difference
between the weakest students and the strongest student at that academic level. The lower the
figure, the smaller the difference between the weakest students and the strongest student. The
third column shows the mean in percentages.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
34
Scores per academic level: Listening (54 items)
Eibo
Mean
Std
EarlyBird
Mean
Std
% correct
Lwoo
34,00
7,26
63 %
38,27
6,08
71 %
Vmwo-b
36,23
7,50
67 %
37,71
7,04
70 %
Vmbo-k
39,16
6,62
72 %
40,88
4,65
76 %
Vmbo-gt
39,13
6,71
72 %
42,22
5,62
78 %
Vmbo-tl
40,17
6,91
74 %
41,27
5,72
76 %
Vmbo-tl/Havo
42,91
6,84
79 %
44,93
5,21
83 %
Havo
42,23
6,60
78 %
45,02
5,33
83 %
Havo/Vwo
42,71
7,24
79 %
47,64
3,49
88 %
Vwo
46,59
4,64
86 %
48,21
4,00
89 %
Academic
level
% correct
Table 11: Average scores per academic level for Eibo and EarlyBird - Listening
The mean (average score) on the Listening exam was the lowest at Lwoo and
gradually increased with each academic level, with the exception of Eibo Vmbo-tl/Havo
(79%) and EarlyBird Lwoo (71%) and Vmbo-gt (78%). The score of Eibo Vmbo-tl/Havo (M
= 42.91, SD = 6.84) was slightly higher than Eibo Havo (M = 42.23, SD = 6.60). The
difference was not significant, but could be explained by the fact that Vmbo-tl/Havo a mixed
level. The difference between Vmbo-tl/Havo and Havo was therefore difficult to distinguish
and might be the reason for the difference in scores. Although insignificant, this difference
could have resulted from Lwoo being a Vmbo level as well, as illustrated in Table 4, and
might explain why Lwoo scored higher than Vmbo-b. The difference between EarlyBird
Vmbo-gt (M = 42.22, SD = 5.62) and Vmbo-tl (M = 41.27, SD = 5.72) was slightly greater,
but not significant either. However, the difference could be explained by that they are both
Vmbo levels. It is therefore difficult to distinguish between these two academic levels and this
could explain why Vmbo-gt scores higher than Vmbo-tl.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
35
Scores per academic level: Reading (48 items)
Eibo
Mean
Std
% correct
EarlyBird
Mean
Std
% correct
Lwoo
21,50
1,73
45 %
21,50
5,81
48 %
Vmwo-b
23,07
7,08
48 %
24,00
5,51
50 %
Vmbo-k
23,88
6,08
50 %
25,65
5,33
53 %
Vmbo-gt
25,44
6,71
53 %
28,74
8,03
60 %
Vmbo-tl
26,44
6,62
55 %
26,88
6,91
56 %
Vmbo-tl/Havo
30,48
6,22
64 %
31,07
6,20
65 %
Havo
29,02
6,72
60 %
32,52
6,92
68 %
Havo/Vwo
31,00
7,14
65 %
35,06
5,45
73 %
Vwo
35,53
5,69
75 %
37,27
6,09
78 %
Academic
level
Table 12: Average scores per academic level for Eibo and EarlyBird – Reading
The mean (average score) on the reading exam was the lowest at Lwoo and
gradually increased with each academic level, with the exception of Eibo Vmbo-tl/Havo
(64%) and EarlyBird Vmbo-gt (60%). There was a difference (1.46) between Eibo Vmbotl/Havo (M = 30.48, SD = 6.22) and Havo (M = 29.02, SD = 6.72). The difference between
EarlyBird Vmbo-gt (M = 28.74, SD = 8.03) and Vmbo-tl (M = 26.88, SD = 6.91) was slightly
greater (1.86 question). Similar to the listening exam, this difference could be explain by the
difficulty in distinguishing between these two academic levels. However, the significance of
these differences was not tested.
The mean (average score) of the EarlyBird students on the Use of English exam
gradually increased per academic level, while the average of the Eibo students did not. It
could be that several test parts might have been too difficult for Eibo students (up to Vmbotl/Havo level) resulting in their scores at chance-level.
Again with the exception of EarlyBird Vmbo-gt (64%). The difference (2.59
question) between Vmbo-gt (M = 37.33, SD = 9.22) and Vmbo-tl (M = 34.74, SD = 8.28) was
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
36
higher than on the Listening and Reading exam. This could again be explained by the
difficulty in distinguishing between these two academic levels.
Scores per academic level: Use of English (58 items)
Eibo
Mean
Std
% correct
EarlyBird
Mean
Std
% correct
Lwoo
28,00
8,83
48 %
29,64
8,12
51 %
Vmwo-b
29,36
10,33
51 %
31,33
7,84
54 %
Vmbo-k
28,84
7,38
50 %
33,18
8,21
57 %
Vmbo-gt
29,13
7,04
50 %
37,33
9,22
64 %
Vmbo-tl
29,61
8,58
51 %
34,74
8,28
60 %
Vmbo-tl/Havo
29,17
10,85
50 %
40,00
8,47
69 %
Havo
34,11
7,25
59 %
39,66
8,17
68 %
Havo/Vwo
33,73
8,94
58 %
42,58
7,27
73 %
Vwo
38,75
7,62
67 %
43,37
7,29
75 %
Academic
level
Table 13: Average scores per academic level for Eibo and EarlyBird – Use of English
As illustrated in Table 8, there was a relation between the Cito scores and the
proficiency exam scores (F=210.666; p<.001). The higher the Cito score, the higher the
proficiency exam scores. There was also an interaction effect between test parts and Cito
(F=20.102; p<.001). This indicated that the effect of Cito was greater on some test parts than
on others. Table 14 illustrates the differential effect of Cito test scores on the scores of the
proficiency tests. The effect of Cito scores on Reading (t =7.08, p<.001) was greater than the
effect on Listening (t =2.26, p .02). The effect of Cito scores on Use of English (t =4.04,
p<.001) was significant, but was still less than the effect on Reading. This effect combined
with six years less of English instruction could explain why there was only a clear difference
distinguishable between the Eibo Vmbo levels and the higher levels and why the scores of the
EarlyBird students gradually increased with each academic level.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
37
Differential effect of Cito test scores on proficiency tests
Listening
Cito
Reading
Cito
Use of English
Cito
t
2,26
p
0,02
significant: higher cito = higher test score
7,08
0,00
significant: higher cito = higher test score
4,04
0,00
significant: higher cito = higher test score
Table 14: Differential effect of Cito test scores in proficiency tests
4.3 Scores per linguistic skill
Which Anglia proficiency level was tested with each item (or question) during the
Listening, Reading and Use of English exam respectively are illustrated in Table 15, 16 and
17. The Anglia proficiency level of each item was based on the proficiency level of the
original Anglia exam from which the exercises were taken. Table 15 to 17 have the same
structure. The first column in each table indicates the Anglia proficiency level that was tested.
These levels are ordered from the lowest to the highest tested proficiency level. The columns
marked “Part” and “Question” indicate the part and question of the exam. Both columns
follow the order of the Anglia proficiency levels. The mean indicates the average scores, i.e.
the how many students answered the question correctly. Here, 1,00 equals all students
answered the question correctly. The standard deviation shows how much the scores of the
students deviate from average. The higher the figure, the greater was the difference between
the weakest students and the strongest student.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
38
Scores per question – Listening
Anglia
proficiency level
Junior
Part
Question
Mean
St. dev.
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
0,93
0,49
0,99
0,95
0,69
0,97
0,26
0,50
0,07
0,22
0,46
0,17
14
15
16
17
18
(19)
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1,00
1,00
1,00
1,00
1,00
(1,04)
0,79
0,81
0,76
0,99
0,97
0,92
0,90
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
(-)
0,41
0,40
0,43
0,89
0,18
0,27
0,31
2
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
0,96
0,99
0,97
0,98
0,93
0,75
0,85
0,19
0,11
0,18
0,15
0,25
0,43
0,36
3
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
0,86
0,88
0,72
0,54
0,93
0,86
0,71
0,87
0,71
0,64
0,77
0,82
0,58
0,35
0,33
0,45
0,50
0,26
0,35
0,45
0,34
0,46
0,48
0,42
0,38
0,49
4
40
41
42
43
44
45
0,81
0,44
0,68
0,42
0,38
0,86
0,39
0,50
0,47
0,49
0,49
0,34
5
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
0,79
0,55
0,87
0,56
0,95
0,77
0,81
0,87
0,55
0,41
0,50
0,34
0,50
0,21
0,42
0,40
0,34
0,50
Primary
1
Preliminary
1
2
Elementary
1
Pre-Intermediate
1
Intermediate
1
Advanced
Proficiency
3
Table 15: Scores per question – Listening
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
39
Part 2 of the Listening exam consisted of question 14 to 19. Question 14 to 18 were
answered correctly by all students. The results of question 19 were incorrect. This resulted
from a problem during data entry or data analysis and could therefore not be used. Part 2
consisted of a gap-filler exercise at preliminary level in which the possible answers were
listed. It seemed likely that because all students answered questions 14 to 18 correctly, they
were either all at preliminary level or the questions were simply too easy. However, when
considering the scores on the questions on the two lower proficiency level Junior and Primary,
the score on question 2 was curious. Question 2 in Part 1 of the Listening exam was a multiple
choice question at Junior level in which the students needed to pick the correct picture out of
4 different ones. The recited text consisted of one word, i.e. “trousers”. Judging by the score,
most students have not recognised this word. This does not necessarily mean that Junior was
too advanced for the students. Because most students answered the questions at Primary and
Preliminary correctly, it seemed more likely that question 2 was an anomaly. Almost all
students answered the questions on Elementary, Pre-Intermediate and Intermediate level
correctly as well. However, out of the questions at Intermediate level, the scores on Part 3
were lower than on Part 1 and 2. Part 3 consisted of true or false questions in which the
correct information needed to be gathered from a monologue. It seemed that when the
answers were not stated explicitly, the students had more trouble with finding the right
answer. This was emphasised by the results on question 34 to 39 of Part 3 which were at
Proficiency level. Here, the students did not score consistently. Some questions were
answered better than others (question 50), but some were answered more poorly than others
(question 43 and 44). However, it did seem like some students did reach Proficiency level. In
sum, the average Anglia proficiency level students reached for Listening might be between
Intermediate and Proficiency.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
40
According to Figure 1, the corresponding CEFR level to Intermediate and
Proficiency was B1 and C1. This seemed unrealistically high, because C1 is ranked as the
second highest attainable proficiency level. “Proficiency (C1) is the level normally used by
students applying to university or other institutes of higher/further education as the
qualification which shows they have international student competence in the English
language” (Anglia, 2009, p.49). None of the exercises in the listening exam came even
remotely near this level.
Anglia categorised Part 5 as C1, because it consisted of exercises which demanded
from the students to give the appropriate responds to a dictated question. Anglia’s Handbook
for Teachers describes this level as follows: “Listening for appropriateness, meaning and
context in a spoken situation. 10 three-part multiple-choice items. The candidate chooses the
correct reply to a question or statement” (Anglia, 2009, p. 61). However, this description
might be most similar to the CEFR A2 level which is described as: “CAN express simple
opinions or requirements in a familiar context” (Cambridge English Teacher, 2013). In
addition, the manner in which the dictation was recited was similar to that in Part 1.
Therefore, although the questions varied in difficulty, Part 5 was simply not an exercise on C1
level. Instead of the corresponding Anglia Proficiency – C1 estimation, it was more realistic
to estimate the tested proficiency level at A2. In contrast, Anglia estimated that Intermediate
was similar to B1. Intermediate level was described as: “Listening for meaning. Ten
conversations. 4 options given for each. The candidate listens and chooses the correct option.
There are distracters in the conversation and the answer is not always stated explicitly”
(Anglia, 2009, p. 59). When comparing this criterion with the criteria of C1 in Table 2, the
levels seem quite similar. However, because there were no questions at Advanced level (B2),
the level between Intermediate and Proficiency, it was impossible to determine if students
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
41
also master Advanced level. This problem combined with the scores on Part 3 and 4 at
Proficiency level, made it difficult to assess if students really did reach Proficiency level.
In sum, it was difficult to determine from this test which specific Anglia proficiency
level students reached at the end of primary school. The Anglia proficiency levels for
Listening could lie between Intermediate and Proficiency. However, because there were no
questions at Advanced level included in the exam, it was not possible to assess if students
mastered this level or not. It was also difficult to determine which CEFR proficiency levels
were similar to these Anglia proficiency levels, because when comparing the descriptions of
the “corresponding” Anglia and CEFR level, their contends did not sufficiently match. Based
on this test, it was not possible to estimate which specific CEFR level students reach at the
end of primary school.
Scores per question – Reading
Anglia
proficiency level
Elementary
Part
Question
Mean
St. dev.
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0,87
0,81
0,85
0,94
0,90
0,92
0,66
0,58
0,34
0,39
0,36
0,24
0,30
0,27
0,47
0,49
2
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
0,67
0,82
0,68
0,91
0,51
0,76
0,47
0,53
0,47
0,38
0,47
0,29
0,50
0,43
0,50
0,50
Pre-Intermediate
3
Intermediate
4
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
0,61
0,64
0,80
0,86
0,84
0,79
0,80
0,66
0,65
0,33
0,58
0,92
0,58
0,49
0,48
0,40
0,35
0,37
0,41
0,40
0,47
0,48
0,47
0,50
0,27
0,49
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
5
Advanced
6
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
42
0,71
0,78
0,70
0,27
0,65
0,73
0,60
0,81
0,35
0,47
0,38
0,42
0,73
0,35
0,39
0,35
0,40
0,34
0,51
0,45
0,41
0,46
0,44
0,48
0,44
0,49
0,39
0,48
0,50
0,49
0,49
0,45
0,48
0,49
0,48
0,49
0,47
0,50
Table 16: Scores per question – Reading
Overall, the average score on the Reading exam gradually decreased as the questions
became more difficult. However, there were some scores that warrent further explanation,
such as questions 13, 15 and 16 in Part 2. It was curious that the scores in Part 2 were lower
than in Part 1 even though all questions were at Elementary level. When comparing the texts
of Part 1 and 2, it became apparent that the lay-out of the text might have been the cause of
the difference in scores. The text in Part 1 was divided into clearer and shorter paragraphs
than the text in Part 2. It was therefore easier to find the correct information in the text of Part
1 than in that of Part 2. This suggested that, although both Part 1 and 2 were at Elementary
level, Part 2 was more difficult than Part 1. The low score on question 26 could be explained
by the fact that the answer to the question was too vague. The students had to choose between
true or false on the following statement: “The metal was less than 1 cm long”. However, the
text only mentioned “a tiny piece of metal”. It was therefore a matter of interpretation whether
the question was true or false, because even if the piece of metal was 2 cm, it might still have
been considered small. The high score on question 28 could be explained by that the answer
to the question was stated explicitly in the text, which made this question quite easy compared
to the other questions at Intermediate level. There was also a difference between the scores in
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
43
Part 4 and Part 5. Although the texts in Part 4 and 5 consisted of approximately the same
amount of words, the text in Part 5 was more difficult than the text in Part 4. The text in Part 5
contained much more information than the text in Part 4, which made it harder to find the
right information. Similar to Part 1 and 2, Part 5 was more difficult than Part 4 although Part 4
and 5 were both at Intermediate level.
Anglia (2009) estimated that Elementary was similar to A2, Intermediate was similar
to B1 and Advanced was similar to B2. Comparing the Anglia and CEFR proficiency levels
was problematic, because Anglia includes writing skills and grammatical knowledge with the
reading comprehension, whereas the CEFR does not. The differences in reading
comprehension that were distinguishable between Anglia proficiency levels were the type of
questions accompanying the text and the amount of words each text consisted of. Both criteria
were not used in the description of the CEFR levels, which made it difficult to compare the
Anglia and CEFR proficiency levels. Some Anglia proficiency levels did describe additional
criteria. At Intermediate level the text could have different genres and lay-outs. This was
difficult to check, because all texts in the Reading exam were articles. Similarly, at advanced
level the text could be either fiction or non-fiction. This was also not tested during the
Reading exam and could therefore not be used. When comparing all 6 texts with each other it
became apparent that the difficulty of the texts increased as the texts became longer and the
amount of information in the text increased. Table 2 showed the criteria for Reading A2. The
criteria for B1 was “I can understand texts that consist mainly of high frequency everyday or
job-related language” (CEFR, 2001, p. 26). It was difficult to determine where the boundaries
between “a very short, simple text” (A2) and a “texts that consist mainly of high frequency
everyday or job-related language” lay (CEFR, 2001, p. 26). These descriptions were too
vague in order to determine on which CEFR level the exercises were. In addition, the criteria
for B2 was “I can read articles and reports concerned with contemporary problems in which
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
44
the writers adopt particular attitudes or viewpoints” (CEFR, 2001, p. 26). The Reading exam
did not contain argumentative articles making it difficult to judge if Part 6 met the
requirements of a text at B2 level.
In sum, the Anglia proficiency levels for Reading could lie between Elementary and
Intermediate. However, because Anglia includes writing skills and grammatical knowledge in
the Reading comprehension (which were not tested with the Listening, Reading and Use of
English exam) whereas the CEFR does not, it became difficult to determine which CEFR
proficiency levels were similar to these Anglia proficiency levels. Anglia and CEFR simply
do not use the same criteria for their estimation of reading comprehension. Still, judging by
the scores in Table 16 and the CEFR description in Table 2, it does seem likely that students
do master A2 level.
Scores per question – Use of English
Angliaprof. level
Primary
Part
Question
Mean
St. dev.
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
99
81
91
97
98
78
0,10
0,40
0,29
0,18
0,13
0,41
2
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
97
96
88
96
83
75
56
82
0,18
0,19
0,33
0,21
0,37
0,43
0,50
0,38
3
15
16
17
18
19
80
64
94
78
70
0,40
0,48
0,23
1,12
0,46
4
20
21
22
23
24
94
99
80
88
84
0,24
0,10
0,40
0,33
0,37
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
Preliminary
Elementary
Pre-Intermediate
45
25
26
27
28
-
15
55
80
51
-
0,36
0,50
0,40
0,50
-
4
29
30
31
32
33
83
91
59
22
72
0,38
0,29
0,49
0,42
0,45
5
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
26
50
53
51
53
72
63
64
24
25
0,44
0,50
0,50
0,55
0,50
0,45
0,48
0,48
0,43
0,43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
11
69
71
72
69
27
22
50
19
56
88
18
27
53
45
0,32
0,46
0,45
0,45
0,46
0,44
0,42
0,50
0,39
0,50
0,33
0,39
0,45
0,50
0,50
-
6
7
Intermediate
MA-thesis
8
Table 17: Scores per question – Use of English
The proficiency levels that were tested with the Use of English exam ranged from
Primary to Intermediate, which (according to Anglia) corresponded with CEFR A1 to B1.
This was impossible to verify, because the CEFR has no proficiency level descriptions for
grammar. However, the scores in Table 17 may have indicated which type of grammatical
knowledge students have acquired.
The scores on Part 1 and 2 indicated that most students were able choose the correct
synonyms and opposites of presented words. The scores on Part 3 indicated that most students
were able to construct a proper grammatical sentence when the sentence was presented in
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
46
chunks (groups of words). Questions 25 in Part 4 had a particularly low score. Here, the
students needed to choose the correct personal pronoun. It is not clear why this particular
pronoun posed such a problem to the students, because the scores on other questions
concerning personal pronouns, such as question 20 and 23, were relatively high. The scores
on Part 5 were particularly low. Similar to Part 3, the students needed to construct correct
grammatical sentences. However, the students were now presented with singular words
instead of groups of words. This made the exercise more difficult and this is reflected in the
scores. The scores on Part 6 were interesting, because of the manner in which question 42 and
43 were answered incorrectly. In all question in Part 6 the students were asked to put an
adverb in the correct place in a sentence. During the grading of the exams, it became apparent
that most students did indeed know where to place the adverb, but did not know the words
“rarely” and “hardly”. Instead, they constructed sentences such as “They saw the hardly
monkeys at the zoo” and “Peter visits his rarely uncle these days”. This is interesting,
because, although students did not know the meaning of the word or that all words were
adverbs, they subconsciously used the adverbs as adjectives. This was actually quite logical
and indicated that most students had learned how to use adverbs and adjectives. Question 44
in Part 7 had the lowest score of the entire exam. It was the only question in Part 7 which
concerned the past continuous. The students were presented with the sentence: “The man was
driving ___”. They could choose one of the following options: “danger”, “dangerous” and
“dangerously”. Being unfamiliar with the past continuous could be the reason for this low
score. The scores on Part 8 were consistently low except for question 54: “He is so much
better now than he was last year”. A possible reason could be that the sentence in question 54
had a higher frequency than the other sentences.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
5
MA-thesis
47
Discussion
5.1 Conclusion
This study reported on the differences in English proficiency levels between EarlyBird
students, who receive English instruction from group 1 to 8, and Eibo students, who receive
English instruction in group 7 and 8, at the end of primary school. An analyses of the
Listening, Reading and Use of English exams and the scores of Eibo and EarlyBird students
on these exams provided insight into how students in primary education differ with respect
to English proficiency final attainment levels at the end of group 8.
First, the data showed that EarlyBird students scored higher than the Eibo students on
the Listening, Reading and Use of English exams. In addition, the EarlyBird students also
scored higher than the Eibo students at each academic level. This suggested that EarlyBird
students reach higher final attainment levels than Eibo students. This can be considered a
small to medium effect size (Cohen’s d .20 - .50).
Secondly, as the academic levels became higher, the average scores increased
gradually indicating a relationship between the Cito exam scores and the English proficiency
exam scores, which was further confirmed by the data presented in Table 9 and 14. The Cito
exam scores combined with the school level advice could be used as an indicator of which
final attainment level a student in primary school could reach. The correlation between Cito
exam scores and the proficiency exam scores indicated that the higher the academic level, the
higher the proficiency level was.
Finally, it was difficult to determine if there was a difference in proficiency level
(Anglia and CEFR) between the linguistic skills listening, reading and use of English. On the
one hand, this could be caused by the fact that the listening and reading exam did not test the
same proficiency levels. Consequently, it was problematic to compare the results of the
Listening, Reading and Use of English exam. To verify if there was a difference in final
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
48
attainment level for listening, reading and use of English the exams should have tested the
same range of proficiency levels, but also contain the same amount of items to be tested at
each proficiency level. On the other hand, although Anglia has estimated which CEFR
proficiency levels correspond with the Anglia proficiency levels, the tested Anglia proficiency
levels cannot be linked directly to the CEFR proficiency levels because after further
comparisons the Anglia and CEFR proficiency level descriptions did not correspond. This
made it problematic to determine which exact CEFR proficiency level was attained by the
students.
In conclusion, with respect to English proficiency final attainment levels, students did
indeed differ at the end of primary school. Although it was difficult to determine which
specific proficiency levels were attained, the data showed that EarlyBird students scored
higher than the Eibo students and, as the academic levels became higher, the average test
scores increased gradually indicating that there was a difference in proficiency level between
weaker and stronger students. This difference in proficiency level could be significant for the
development (or modification) of English curricula for primary education and for the further
specifications of English proficiency final attainment level descriptions. Consequently, the
difference in proficiency level suggests that during the developments of curricula for primary
education one must take these differences into account and incorporate materials into the
curricula that account for these differences. In other words, the English curriculum still has to
be a challenge to more advanced students, but still understandable for weaker students.
Furthermore, although EarlyBird students reached higher final attainment levels, it is still
unclear if there should be two sets of CEFR English final attainment targets (one for Eibo and
one for Vvto) as suggested by the European Platform. The effect size of EarlyBird students
reaching higher final attainment levels than Eibo students can be considered a small to
medium (Cohen’s d .20 - .50). However, to determine if the difference in proficiency levels
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
49
between Eibo and EarlyBird students is significant enough to warrant the necessity of two sets
of CEFR final attainment targets, more data is needed.
5.2 Application of results
5.2.1 Ideal learning trajectory
If EarlyBird students’ higher scores are the result of the informal instruction they
receive during the period when the brain has not lost its plasticity yet is debatable (Penfield
and Roberts, 1959). The higher scores can also be attributed to the six years of English
instruction EarlyBird students receive more compared to Eibo students. Consequently, this
study does not test the influence of the lost of the brain’s plasticity at (approximately) age 9
and cannot confirm this hypothesis. However, this study does show that the EarlyBird
programme does provide better results than the Eibo programme. This confirms that Vvto (but
also early English in general) provides a solid foundation for English on which can be build
during secondary education (Thijs et al, 2011). Concerning the optimisation of this
foundation, one could look at which method of instruction is most beneficial to the students.
Krashen (1981) suggests that early learners require informal interaction in the target
language with the emphasis on conveying the message and not on correctness of grammar. By
rephrasing and simplifying their utterances, instructors can help students understand them and
these modifications help the learning process. No grammar rules are needed, because the brain
uses two different cognitive mechanisms to compensate for this (Lawyer and Selinker, 1971).
One the one hand, there are the “mechanisms that guide ‘automatic’ language performance”
and on the other hand, there are the “mechanisms that guide puzzle- or problem-solving
performance” (Krashen, 1981, p. 2). This idea is reflected in Krashen’s theory (1981) on the
types of language learners: monitor underusers, monitor overusers and monitor optimal users.
Monitor underusers do not rely on rules at all, but rely solely on the natural cognitive
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
50
mechanisms to acquire a L2. Students in primary education could be described as monitor
underusers, because their brains’ plasticity enables them to acquire a L2 in a natural way.
Because they mainly receive informal English instruction, their focus lies on interaction and
conveying messages instead of grammatical correctness. In other words, they rely on instinct.
In contrast, monitor overusers do not rely on instinct, but only on the rules of the language,
such as grammar. Because grammatical correctness is favoured over conveying the message
during interaction, the L2 production and acquisition is impaired. If students in primary
schools mainly receive formal English instruction, the attainment levels would be poor
because it would interfere with the natural process of L2 acquisition (Gardner, 1983 &
Genesee 1976). However, if the skills of monitor underusers and –overusers are combined
students become monitor optimal-users, which are a balance between over- and underusers.
This hypothesis suggest that students in primary education build the best foundation through
informal instruction which is then further developed by added formal instruction during
secondary education. Similarly, Muñoz (2006) indicated that the L2 learning rate of late
learners (older than 9 such as adolescents and adults) is faster and more efficient than that of
early learners. Snow and Hoefnagel-Höhle (1977, 1978) reached the same conclusion.
However, this rate advantage proved to be temporary. Furthermore, Oyama (1976) and
Patkowski (1980) found that early L2 learners had a higher proficiency level than adolescent
and adult L2 learners, which could have resulted from the informal exposure early learners
received while living in the target language environment. Long (1990) confirmed these
findings. These studies suggest that the ideal learning trajectory is by building foundation
through (mainly) informal instruction in primary education, which is then further developed
by adding formal instruction during secondary education.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
51
5.2.2 Establishing final attainment levels
The suggested CEFR levels by the European Platform for Vvto-students look feasible
(Table 1 and 2). The suggested minimum Listening proficiency level for Vmbo (A1) and
Havo (A2) seem plausible. However, to know for certain if Vwo-students reach A2/B1 level,
the Listening proficiency exam has to be modified in order to make the correlation between
Anglia and CEFR more clear. Furthermore, the data suggests that these proposed final
attainment levels are also suitable for Eibo-students. EarlyBird students do reach higher
proficiency levels, but these levels seem adequate for Eibo students as well. The suggested
Reading CEFR proficiency levels for Vmbo (A1), Havo (A2) and Vwo (A2) seem suitable as
final attainment levels for Eibo- and EarlyBird-students as well.
However, it must be considered that although students seem to reach the suggested
CEFR final attainment levels, the current format of the attainment levels might be too roughly
formulated or too vague in order to be effectively used. First, the proficiency level
descriptions lack clear boundaries which make it difficult to distinguish one proficiency level
from another. In addition, as Thijs et al. (2011) suggested, the existing attainment targets are
impractical because they do not contain a visible correlation between different linguistic skills
(such as listening, speaking, reading and writing), they have no apparent link to the attainment
targets for English in secondary school, and are too vaguely formulated. As a result, the
suggested CEFR proficiency levels could be used as final attainment levels, if the proficiency
level descriptions are modified and the attainment targets rewritten to incorporate the
previously mentioned deficits.
5.2.3 Suggestions
Hypothetically, instead of focusing on modifying the existing CEFR proficiency levels
and attainment targets to fit current demands, it might be easier to decide which linguistic
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
52
skills students should have mastered at the end of primary school first, then determine how
these skills can be attained.
The attainment targets should concern the four areas of language: listening, speaking,
reading and writing. Conversing, if the ideal learning trajectory is building a foundation
through (mainly) informal instruction in primary education, which is then further developed
by adding formal instruction during secondary education, writing should be limited to
dictation only (words and high frequency sentences). If writing would include more than
dictation, students would require grammatical knowledge of the English language. Matters
such as “which is the correct word order in a sentence” or “what is the correct tense of the
verb in this setting” concern metalinguistic knowledge and skills. Because this is formal
instruction, in primary education this should be not be focussed on in order to follow the
suggested ideal learning trajectory.
This study indicated that the suggested CEFR final attainment levels for listening and
reading (Table 1 and 2) by the European Platform seem feasible for Eibo and Vvto students.
The European Platform also formulated suggested CEFR levels for Speaking and Writing for
Vvto students, which can be found in Table 18 and 197. The data gathered from the Speaking
exams and Dictation exams, which were a part of this study, could provide a starting point for
determining if these suggested proficiency levels are feasible.
Suggested final attainment levels for Vvto by CEFR
Vmbo
Havo
Vwo
Speaking
A1
A2
A2/B1
Writing
A1
A1/A2
A2
Table 18: Suggested final attainment levels for Vvto by CEFR
7
Table 18 and 19 are based on CEFR (Council of Europe, 2001).
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
53
CEFR descriptions of final attainment levels
Speaking
Interaction
Production
A1
A2
B1
I can interact in a simple
way provided the other
person is prepared to
repeat or rephrase things
at a slower rate of speech
and help me formulate
what I’m trying to say. I
can ask and answer simple
questions in areas of
immediate need or on very
familiar topics.
I can us simple phrases
and sentences to describe
where I live and people I
know.
I can communicate in
simple and routine tasks
requiring a simple and
direct exchange of
information on familiar
topics and activities. I can
handle very short social
exchanges, even though I
can’t usually understand
enough to keep the
conversation going myself.
I can use a series of
phrases and sentences to
describe in simple terms
my family and other
people, living conditions,
my educational
background and my
present or most recent job.
I can deal with most
situations likely to arise
whilst travelling in an area
where the language is
spoken. I can enter
unprepared into
conversation on topics that
are familiar, of personal
interest or pertinent to
everyday life (e.g. family,
hobbies, work, travel and
current events).
I can write a short, simple I can write short, simple
postcard, for example
notes and messages
sending holliday
relating to matters in areas
greetings. I can fill in
of immediate need. I can
forms with personal
write a very simple
details, for example
personal letter, for
entering my name,
example thanking someone
nationality and address on for something.
a hotel registration form.
Table 19: CEFR descriptions of final attainment levels
Writing
I can connect phrases in a
simple way in order to
describe experiences and
events, my dreams, hopes
and ambitions. I can
briefly give reasons and
explanations for opinions
and plans. I can narrate a
story or relate the plot of a
book or film and describe
my reactions.
I can write simple
connected text on topics
which are familiar to or of
personal interest. I can
write personal letters
describing experiences and
impressions.
These suggested CEFR proficiency levels could form the basis of the final attainment
targets. The final attainment targets should contain a visible correlation between different
linguistic skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing) and they should be linked to the
attainment targets for English in secondary school (Thijs et al., 2011).
The combination of these suggested CEFR final attainment levels, the accompanying
proficiency level descriptions and the attainment targets could form the goals which students
should reach at the end of primary school. A clear goal to which can be worked towards to is
significant, because it makes it easier to assess the students’ proficiency. In addition, it could
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
improve the development of English curricula for primary education by making it more
specific. By basing a curriculum on steps towards a goal, it might become easier to develop
relevant teaching materials. By first deciding on a clear goal, then reverse engineer it into a
curriculum, might provide clearer data with which the exact English proficiency levels of
Eibo and Vvto students can be assessed, monitored and improved.
54
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
55
References
Anglia (2009). Handbook for Teachers. England: Anglia Examinations Syndicate Limited.
Anglia (2013). Anglia Network Europe. Retrieved from http://www.anglianetwork.eu/
Bodde-Alderlieste, M. (2005). A case for primary English. Levende Talen Magazine, 92, 5-7.
Cambridge English Teacher. (2013). CEFR Levels for Language Learners. Retrieved from
http://www.cambridgeenglishteacher.org/what_is_this
Cito (2013). Betekenis van de standaardscore op de Citotoets. [PDF document]. Retrieved
from Cito website: http://www.cito.nl/~/media/cito_nl/Files/Primair%20en%20
speciaal%20onderwijs/cito_eindtoets_betekenis_van_de_standaardscore.ashx
Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
EarlyBird (2011). EarlyBird Curriculum. [PDF document]. Retrieved from EarlyBird Web
site: http://www.earlybirdie.nl/cp/uploads/downloads/EarlyBird-curriculum_november
%202011_1351516417.pdf
EarlyBird (2013). Landelijke ontwikkelingen. Retrieved from http://earlybirdie.nl/index.php?
page=VVTO-Landelijke_ontwikkelingen&pid=184
European Platform (2011). Naar eindtermen vvto Engels, een eerste kennismaking. [DOC
document]. Retrieved from European Platform Web site:
http://www.europeesplatform.nl/sf.mcgi?ac=show&id=15&term=naar+eindtermen+en
gels&searchoption=1&recursive=1
European Platform (2013). Mission, Vision and Ambition. Retrieved from
http://www.europeesplatform.nl/sf.mcgi?3326&cat=64
Fromkin, V. (2007). An Introduction to Language. USA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
56
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. [PDF document].
Retrieved from Boston College University Libraries Web site:
http://digilib.bc.edu/reserves/ps369/winn/ps36983.pdf
Genesee, F. (1976). The Role of Intelligence in Second Language Learning. Language
Learning, 26/2, 267-80.
Government of the Netherlands. (2013). Primary Education. Retrieved from
http://www.government.nl/issues/education/
Herder, A. & Bot, K. de (2007). Vroeg Engels in het Nederlandse taalcurriculum:
Literatuurstudie. [PDF document]. Retrieved from Europees Platform Web site:
www.europeesplatform.nl/sf.mcgi?3861
Krashen, S.D., Long, M. & Scarcella, R. (1979). Age, Rate, and eventual attainment in
Second Language Acquisition. TESOL Quarterly 13, 573-82.
Krashen, S.D. (1981). Second Language Acquisition an Second Language Learning.
Retrieved from Web site: http://sdkrashen.com/SL_Acquisition_and_Learning/
SL_Acquisition_and_Learning.pdf
Lawler, J. & Selinker, L. (1971). On paradoxes, rules, and research in second language
learning. Language Learning 21. Retrieved from http://sdkrashen.com/SL_Acquisition
_and_Learning/SL_Acquisition_and_Learning.pdf
Lenneberg, E.H. (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. New York: John Wiley &
Sons.
Lightbrown, P.M. & Spada, N. (2006). How Languages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Long, M.H. (1990). Maturational Constraints on Language Development. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition 12. 251-86.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
57
Long, M.H. (2005). Problems with Supposed Counter-evidence to the Critical Period
Hypothesis. IRAL 43, 287-317.
Lubbe, M. van der, Hollenberg, J. (2011). Toetsen op School Primair Onderwijs. [PDF
document]. Retrieved from Cito Web site:
www.cito.nl/~/media/cito_nl/Files/.../cito_toetsen_op_school_po.ashx
Ministerie van onderwijs, cultuur en wetenschap (2013). Kerncijfers 2008-2012. [PDF
document]. Retrieved from http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/ministeries/ocw/documentenen-publicaties/jaarverslagen/2013/05/08/ocw-kerncijfers-2008-2012.html
Muñoz, C. (2008). Symmetries and Assymmetries of Age Effects in Naturalistic and
Instructed L2 Learning. Applied Linguistics 29, 578-96.
Ortega, L. (2009). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. London: Hodder Education.
Oyama, S. (1976). A Sensitive Period in the Acquisition of a Non-native Phonological
System. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 5, 261-85.
Patkowski, M. (1980). The Sensitive Period for the Acquisition of Syntax in a Second
Language. Language Learning, 30, 449-72
Penfield, W., Roberts, L. (1959). Speech and Brain Mechanisms. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Saville-Troike, M. (2012). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Snow, C. and Marian Hoefnagel-Höhle (1977, 1978). Age Differences in the Pronunciation of
Foreign Sounds. Language and Speech, 20, 357-65.
Thijs, A., Trimbos, B., Tuin, D., Bodde, M., de Graaf, R. (2011). Engels in het basisonderwijs
[PDF document]. Retrieved from SLO Web site:
http://www.slo.nl/downloads/2011/engels-in-het-basisonderwijs-vakdossier.pdf/
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
58
Appendix
Interne tussenrapportage Eindtermen vvto
Vergelijkend onderzoek tussen EarlyBird en EIBO
Rick de Graaff
Sierd van den Beld, Pauline van den Brink, Lesley Goes, Ruth Knot-de Haan, Arina Meeuse,
Silke Stegmann
Universiteit Utrecht
In opdracht van het Europees Platform, Haarlem
In samenwerking met EarlyBird en Anglia Network Europe
Deze tussenrapportage doet verslag van onderzoek naar de taalvaardigheid Engels in groep 5
en 8 van basisscholen die vroeg vreemdetalenonderwijs (vvto) aanbieden vanaf groep 1, in
vergelijking met scholen met een regulier programma Engels in het Basisonderwijs (EIBO)
vanaf groep 7. Het onderzoek is uitgevoerd in opdracht van het Europees Platform, in
samenwerking met EarlyBird en Anglia Network Europe in het voorjaar van 2013. Deze
interne rapportage vat een aantal voorlopige resultaten samen; eind 2013 zal de volledige
rapportage verschijnen. Over een aantal deelonderzoeken wordt nader verslag gedaan in de
masterscripties van bovengenoemde studenten, die bij de uitvoering van het onderzoek
betrokken zijn geweest.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
59
Inleiding
Engels is een kernvak in het voortgezet onderwijs, net als Nederlands en
rekenen/wiskunde. Voor taal en rekenen wordt het niveau van leerlingen aan het einde van het
basisonderwijs landelijk getoetst in de eindtoets basisonderwijs van Cito. Het overgrote deel
van de basisschoolleerlingen in Nederland neemt deel aan de ‘Citotoets’. Voor Engels
ontbreekt een toetsing van het eindniveau op de basisschool.
Engels is weliswaar sinds 1986 een verplicht vak in het basisonderwijs, maar slechts
de wettelijke verplichting om het vak aan te bieden is vastgelegd. Scholen kunnen eigen
keuzes maken in de vormgeving van het aanbod Engels, bijvoorbeeld in de groepen waarin zij
Engels aanbieden, in de didactiek die zij hanteren, in de leerkrachten die Engels geven, in de
specifieke deskundigheid voor Engels van deze leerkrachten en in de tijd die aan Engels
besteed wordt. Uit onderzoeken blijkt dat scholen in toenemende mate verschillende keuzes
maken en dat er een grote diversiteit bestaat in het Engels dat leerlingen op de basisscholen
aangeboden krijgen (Thijs e.a., 2011).
Bij invoering is ingezet op een communicatieve aanpak en als officieuze richtlijn werd
uitgegaan van een aanbod van 80 tot 100 uur Engels, verdeeld over groep 7 en 8. Uit het
periodiek peilingsonderzoek (PPON) van 1991, 1996 en 2006 blijkt dat leerlingen in het
basisonderwijs tot 2006 gemiddeld niet meer dan totaal zo’n 60 uur Engels kregen (Heesters
e.a., 2008).
In 1993 zijn kerndoelen voor Engels in het basisonderwijs (EIBO) geformuleerd. Bij
de herziening in 1998 zijn de doelen van 1993, waarin verschillende thema's, functies en
noties werden beschreven, versimpeld. In 2006 zijn die doelen nog eens globaler
geformuleerd. De volgende vier kerndoelen voor Engels geven sinds 2006 inhoudelijk
richting aan het vak Engels in het basisonderwijs:
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
60
Kerndoel 13
De leerlingen leren informatie te verwerven uit eenvoudige gesproken en geschreven Engelse
teksten.
Kerndoel 14
De leerlingen leren in het Engels informatie te vragen of geven over eenvoudige
onderwerpen en zij ontwikkelen een attitude waarbij ze zich durven uit te drukken in die taal.
Kerndoel 15
De leerlingen leren de schrijfwijze van enkele eenvoudige woorden over alledaagse
onderwerpen.
Kerndoel 16
De leerlingen leren om woordbetekenissen en schrijfwijzen van Engelse woorden op te
zoeken met behulp van het woordenboek.
In de bijbehorende ‘karakteristiek’ worden de volgende doelstellingen geformuleerd: “Het
doel van Engels is om een eerste basis te leggen om te kunnen communiceren met
moedertaalsprekers of anderen die buiten de school Engels spreken. Die eerste aanzet wordt
later, in de periode van de basisvorming, verder ontwikkeld.” (Ministerie van OCW, 2006).
De doelstellingen voor Engels in het PO zijn, zo stellen we vast, zeer globaal, uiterst
summier en weinig sturend. Ze bieden de basisscholen inhoudelijk veel vrijheden. Voor taal
en rekenen wordt sinds enige jaren met referentieniveaus gewerkt die veel specifieker
beschrijven wat leerlingen wanneer moeten kennen en kunnen (Expertgroep doorlopende
leerlijnen taal en rekenen, 2008). De kerndoelen Engels geven weinig aanknopingspunten om
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
61
het niveau dat basisschoolleerlingen hebben voor Engels in beeld te brengen en maken
opbrengstgericht werken voor Engels niet eenvoudig.
De afgelopen 10 jaar is het zogenaamde ‘vroeg vreemde talenonderwijs’ (vvto) in
Nederland sterk tot ontwikkeling gekomen: vanaf de onderbouw (vaak al in groep 1) wordt
Engels gegeven, de leerkracht spreekt in de les zo veel mogelijk Engels en leerlingen worden
vanaf het begin aangemoedigd Engels te gebruiken. Voor het aanbod van Engels worden
soms native speakers ingezet. In 2013 boden bijna 1000 scholen vvto-Engels aan. Ruim 200
vvto-scholen zijn aangesloten bij het landelijke exepertisecentrum EarlyBird (zie
www.earlybirdie.nl).
Voor vvto-Engels gelden dezelfde doelen of eindtermen als voor EIBO. Hoewel de
wettelijke doelen overeenstemmen, moge het duidelijk zijn dat leerlingen met een aanbod van
8 jaar Engels met een andere bagage voor Engels het voortgezet onderwijs instromen dan
leerlingen die in groep 7 en 8 Engels hebben gehad. Voor VO-scholen, al dan niet met een
afdeling tweetalig onderwijs voor Engels (120 VO-scholen boden in 2013 TTO aan), is
onduidelijk wat van instromende de leerlingen verwacht mag worden en hoe aangesloten kan
worden bij de Engelse taalvaardigheden die leerlingen op de basisschool geleerd hebben.
Daarmee is de context van het vak Engels voor zowel PO als VO onvoldoende helder en
specifiek om de beoogde doorlopende leerlijn te realiseren.
Eigenlijk weten we dus weinig over het beoogde niveau van Engelse taalvaardigheid
aan het eind van de basisschool. Uit de genoemde PPON-peilingen hebben we weliswaar
inzicht in het niveau dat leerlingen met twee jaar EIBO bereiken, maar gezien de
ontwikkelingen voor Engels in het basisonderwijs zijn recente gegevens van belang. In 2012
is opnieuw een PPON Engels uitgevoerd; de resultaten hiervan zullen eind 2013 door Cito
gepubliceerd worden. In 2013 heeft de Universiteit Utrecht, samen met EarlyBird (landelijk
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
62
kenniscentrum voor vvto Engels, zie www.earlybirdie.nl) en Anglia Network Europe (zie
www.anglianetword.eu)
onderzoek gedaan naar de taalvaardigheid Engels van bijna 300 vvto-
leerlingen en bijna 300 EIBO-leerlingen op 19 scholen. In dit voorlopige rapport presenteren
we de belangrijkste resultaten van dit onderzoek. We gaan daarbij in op de verschillen tussen
vvto-leerlingen en reguliere EIBO-leerlingen. Daarnaast kijken we naar verschillen tussen
leerlingen in relatie tot hun uitstroomniveau (vmbo/havo/vwo). Ook rapporteren we een aantal
verschillen tussen vvto-leerlingen in groep 5 en groep 8 (zie ook Geurts & de Graaff, te
verschijnen).
Opzet
In het voorjaar van 2013 heeft de Universiteit Utrecht, samen met EarlyBird en Anglia
Network Europe, onderzoek gedaan naar de Engelse taalvaardigheid in groep 5 en 8. Dit
onderzoek maakte deel uit van een breder onderzoek in opdracht van EarlyBird, waarin de
volgende vragen centraal stonden:
1 Wat is het niveau Engels van vvto-leerlingen op EarlyBird scholen in groep 8, in
vergelijking met leerlingen van reguliere basisscholen?
2 Wat is het niveau Engels van vvto-leerlingen op EarlyBird scholen in groep 5, in
vergelijking met groep 8?
3 Aan welke kwaliteitseisen moet het programma EarlyBird voldoen?
4 Kunnen we een relatie leggen tussen de uitstroomniveaus van de leerlingen en de
ERK-niveaus van de 2e klas VO?
5 Kunnen we een relatie leggen tussen de doorstroomadviezen van de leerlingen naar
het VO en de kwaliteit van het programma?
In dit rapport gaan we alleen in op de volgende deelvragen:
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854

MA-thesis
63
Zijn er in groep 8 verschillen in taalvaardigheid tussen EarlyBird-leerlingen en EIBOleerlingen?

Is er voor EarlyBird en EIBO een relatie tussen doorstroomniveau/citoscore en
taalvaardigheid Engels?

Welke leerlingkenmerken kunnen een rol spelen ter verklaring van hun resultaten?
Deelnemers
Aan het onderzoek in groep 8 hebben 287 vvto-leerlingen meegedaan van 10
EarlyBird scholen, en 275 EIBO-leerlingen van 9 reguliere basisscholen. De vvto-leerlingen
hadden in groep 8 vijf tot acht jaar vvto Engels gehad; de reguliere leerlingen twee jaar EIBO.
De meeste scholen waren gevestigd in de regio Rotterdam. De gespreksvaardigheidstoetsen
zijn afgenomen bij een steekproef van deze leerlingen: 65 vvto-leerlingen, en 63 EIBOleerlingen (6-8 leerlingen per deelnemende school). De ouders van alle leerlingen zijn
schriftelijk geïnformeerd over het onderzoek. Zij konden schriftelijk aangeven of zij er
bezwaar tegen hadden dat hun kind deelnam aan de toetsen en het onderzoek.
Alle deelnemende vvto-scholen gaven Engels vanaf groep 1. Een deel van deze
scholen was nog geen acht jaar vvto-school; daardoor hadden sommige leerlingen minder dan
acht jaar vvto gevolgd. De reguliere basisscholen boden EIBO aan in groep 7 en 8. Sommige
scholen hadden wel plannen om in de toekomst vvto-school te worden, of met EIBO te
beginnen vanaf groep 5. Op negen van de tien vvto-scholen was een vakleerkracht Engels
aanwezig; in drie gevallen was dit een native speaker. Dit wil niet zeggen dat de leerlingen
van deze scholen in alle groepen les hebben van een vakleerkracht; sommige vakleerkrachten
geven maar in een deel van de groepen les. Op de EIBO-scholen werden de lessen Engels
altijd door de groepsleerkrachten gegeven.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
64
De groepen verschilden niet qua gemiddelde cito-score (beide groepen scholen
gemiddeld 534). Ook de verschillen tussen de geselecteerde leerlingen voor de
gespreksvaardigheidstoets waren niet significant (538 voor vvto, 536 voor EIBO). Er was een
hoge correlatie tussen de cito-scores en de doorstroomadviezen (r=.83).
Instrumenten
Om de onderzoeksvragen te beantwoorden, zijn toetsen afgenomen voor
luistervaardigheid, leesvaardigheid, ‘Use of English’ (woordenschat en zinstructuur in
context) en gespreksvaardigheid. De toetsen zijn ontwikkeld in samenwerking met Anglia
Network Europe. Daarnaast is ook een spellingstoets afgenomen (Van Berkel e.a., 2013).
Voor de leerlingkenmerken is gebruik gemaakt van de cito-scores en schooladviezen van de
deelnemende basisscholen, en van de attitudevragenlijst die is ontwikkeld door PPON.
Voor de toetsen is gebruik gemaakt van de toetsdatabase van Anglia Network Europe
(zie http://www.anglia.nl/images/handbook.pdf). Om leerlingen te kunnen toetsen op
verschillende niveaus, zijn opdrachten geselecteerd uit toetsen van onder A1-niveau t/m B2niveau. Ook de spreekvaardigheidstoetsen bevatten vragen en onderwerpen op verschillende
niveaus. Volgens de Anglia-procedure werden deze toetsen afgenomen per tweetal leerlingen,
om de interactiemogelijkheden te vergroten en de spreekdrempel te verlagen.
De toetsen zijn vooraf gepilot op twee vvto-scholen en een EIBO-school, om de
afnameprocedure, moeilijkheidsgraad en betrouwbaarheid te kunnen bepalen. Op enkele
onderdelen is de moeilijkheidsgraad van de toetsen aangepast, om de betrouwbaarheid te
kunnen verhogen. De betrouwbaarheid van de uiteindelijke schriftelijke toetsen lag tussen .82
en .89 (KR alfa).
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
65
Procedure
De scholen zijn vooraf geïnformeerd over de toets- en rapportageprocedure. Alle
leerlingen ontvangen een unieke cijfercode, die gekoppeld was aan de cijfercode van de
betreffende school. Zo konden alle resultaten anoniem verwerkt en gerapporteerd worden. De
scholen hebben aan het eind van het onderzoek de anonieme resultaten van de eigen
leerlingen ontvangen, en de vergelijking van de schoolresultaten met die van de andere
geanonimiseerde scholen.
De toetsen zijn afgenomen door zes getrainde studenten Engels van de Educatieve
Masteropleiding van de Universiteit Utrecht. Zij hebben in tweetallen de 19 scholen bezocht.
Tijdens het ochtendprogramma hebben zij de schriftelijke toetsen afgenomen. Tijdens het
middagprogramma is bij een steekproef van leerlingen de gespreksvaardigheidstoets
afgenomen. Deze toetsen zijn opgenomen met digitale audioapparatuur en geanonimiseerd
opgeslagen.
Alle antwoorden zijn anoniem gescoord door de zes studenten. Ook de
gespreksvaardigheidstoetsen zijn beoordeeld door de studenten. Iedere opname is beoordeeld
door 1 student; bij een kwart van de opnames heeft een tweede beoordeling plaatsgevonden,
door een ervaren Anglia examinator. De interbeoordelaarsbetrouwbaarheid zal binnenkort
worden vastgesteld.
Alle resultaten zijn ingevoerd in Excel, en geanalyseerd in SPSS. Voor de
effectstudies zijn multilevel-analyses gebruikt, waarbij onderscheid is gemaakt tussen schoolen leerlingniveau.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
66
Resultaten
Prestaties op de schriftelijke toetsen
De gemiddelde score op alle schriftelijke toetsen samen voor de vvto-leerlingen was
70%; voor de EIBO-leerlingen was dit 64% (zie Tabel 1). Dit verschil is significant (zie Tabel
2: F=12.86, p=.002); hierbij een sprake van een ‘klein tot matig effect’ (Cohen’s d .20 - .50).
De effecten zijn het grootst op Use of English (d = .55), leesvaardigheid (d = .41) en
luistervaardigheid (d = .48), en kleiner op spelling (d = .24; niet significant) (zie Tabel 3).
vvto
EIBO
sd
M
sd
M
Luisteren
0,83
0,11
0,78
0,13
Lezen
0,67
0,16
0,61
0,16
Use of E
0,68
0,15
0,60
0,15
Spelling
0,64
0,24
0,58
0,24
Totaal
0,70
0,19
0,64
0,19
Tabel 1: Gemiddelden en standaarddeviaties van vvto- en EIBO-leerlingen op de schriftelijke
toetsen
F
p
test
22,869
0,000
cito
208,846
0,000
vvto
12,864
0,002
test * cito
20,102
0,000
test * vvto
7,560
0,000
Tabel 2: Effecten van citoscore en wel/niet vvto op testscores
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
t
listening * cito
reading * cito
use of E * cito
dictation * cito
67
p
2,107
7,006
3,460
8,064
0,036
0,000
0,001
0,000
listening * vvto
-3,411
0,002
reading * vvto
-3,179
0,003
use of E * vvto
-4,759
0,000
dictation * vvto
-1,043
0,304
Tabel 3: Effecten van citoscore en wel/niet vvto per toetsonderdeel
De verschillen tussen de scholen binnen de beide groepen zijn groot: leerlingen van sommige
vvto-scholen scoren gemiddeld lager dan leerlingen van sommige EIBO-scholen. 73% van de
variantie tussen leerlingen werd verkaard door variantie tussen scholen.
Er bleek een sterke samenhang tussen de cito-score van de leerlingen en hun
resultaten op de schriftelijke toetsen (zie Tabel 2: F=208.85, p<.001). Deze samenhang was
het grootste voor leesvaardigheid, Use of English en spelling, en kleiner voor
luistervaardigheid (zie Tabel 3). Tabel 4 toont de gemiddelde toetsscores per
doorstroomadvies naar VO, over de toetsonderdelen Luisteren, Lezen, Use of English en
Spelling samen.
M (vvto)
(sd)
M
(EIBO)
(sd)
LWO
.54
.10
.47
.12
Vmbo basis
.59
.16
.52
.17
Vmbo kader
.59
.11
.56
.11
Vmbo gt
.68
.14
.56
.09
Vmbo tl
.62
.13
.60
.13
Tl/havo
.71
.12
.67
.12
p < .05
*
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
68
Havo
.72
.13
.65
.12
*
Havo/vwo
.79
.09
.68
.15
*
Vwo
.79
.11
.77
.10
Tabel 4: Gemiddelde scores en standaarddeviaties van vvto- en EIBO-leerlingen per
doorstroomadvies naar VO
We zien dat leerlingen die doorstromen naar een hogere vorm van VO in vrijwel alle gevallen
beter presteren dan leerlingen die op een niveau lager doorstromen. Ook zien we dat op alle
doostroomadviesniveaus de vvto-leerlingen beter presteren dan de EIBO-leerlingen. Over alle
schriftelijke toetsen gemiddeld zijn deze verschillen zijn significant voor de
doorstroomadviesniveaus vmbo-gt, havo en havo-vwo. In de definitieve rapportage zullen ook
de verschillen per toetsonderdeel worden weergegeven.
Prestaties op de mondelinge toetsen
Op basis van de prestaties op de gespreksvaardigheidstoets zijn de leerlingen
ingedeeld in zeven Anglia-niveaus, lopend van First Step/Junior (pre-A1) tot Intermediate
(B1). Het gemiddelde niveau van de vvto-leerlingen lag tussen Preliminary (A1) en
Elementary (A2); van de EIBO-leerlingen lag het tussen Primary (pre-A1) en Preliminary
(A1) (volgens de indeling van het Anglia Hoadbook for Teachers, zie
http://www.anglia.nl/images/handbook.pdf). Figuur 2 maakt de verschillen inzichtelijk tussen
de EIBO-leerlingen en de EarlyBird leerlingen. Overigens zijn ook 60 vvto-leerlingen uit
groep 5 getoetst; hun niveau lag vooral op First Step (1) en Junior (2): ruim onder dat van de
EIBO-leerlingen in groep 8. De vvto-leerlingen maken dus een enorme sprong in hun
gespreksvaardigheid tussen groep 5 en groep 8. In tegenstelling tot de schriftelijke toetsen, is
het effect van cito-score op de gespreksvaardigheidstoetsen niet significant: leerlingen met
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
69
een hogere cito-score presteren niet gemiddeld beter op de gespreksvaardigheidstoetsen dan
leerlingen met een lagere cito-score.
30
25
20
gr 8 EIBO
15
gr 8 EB
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Figuur 2: Aantallen leerlingen per gespreksvaardigheidsniveau voor vvto (gr 8 EB) en EIBO
(gr 8 EIBO). Niveau 1-3 = pre-A1; niveau 4=A1; niveau 5=A2; niveau 6=A2/B1; niveau
7=B1, volgens http://www.anglia.nl/images/handbook.pdf
Attitude en Taalcontact
92% van de getoetste leerlingen heeft een online vragenlijst ingevuld over hun
attitude, buitenschools taalcontact, taalachtergrond en zelfingeschatte taalvaardigheid. Er
bleek een duidelijk verband tussen attitude en toetsresultaten, en ook tussen buitenschools
taalcontact en toetsresultaten: leerlingen met een positieve attitude presteerden beter op de
schriftelijke toetsen; datzelfde gold voor leerlingen die veel contact hadden met Engels buiten
school (op twee van de drie vraaggroepen). Er waren geen verschillen tussen vvto- en EIBOleerlingen: zij hadden dezelfde attitude ten opzichte van het belang en gebruik van Engels, en
ook even veel contact met Engels buiten school. De resultaten zijn samengevat in Tabel 5.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
70
Verder schatten de vvto-leerlingen hun eigen taalvaardigheid iets hoger in dan de EIBOleerlingen; de significantie en efffectgrootte van deze en andere relevante verschillen zal
worden gerapporteerd in het eindrapport..
F
p
Vvto
12,864
0,002
Motivatie
33,178
0
btcA
7,248
0,007
btcB
0,369
0,544
btcC
9,907
0,002
motivatie *
vvto
2,354
0,126
btcA * vvto
0,004
0,952
btcB * vvto
0,346
0,557
btcC * vvto
3,538
0,061
Tabel 5: Effecten van wel/niet vvto, motivatie en buitenschools taalcontact (clusters A, B en
C) op toetsresultaten.
Voorlopige conclusies
Het vvto-EIBO-onderzoek heeft gekeken naar de taalvaardigheid Engels in groep 5 en
8, en naar verschillen tussen vvto-leerlingen en EIBO-leerlingen. Het onderzoek in groep 8
laat zien dat vvto-leerlingen (na 5 tot 8 jaar Engels) gemiddeld beter presteren dan EIBOleerlingen (na 2 jaar Engels), op luister- en leesvaardigheid, Use of English en
gespreksvaardigheid. Ook rapporteert het onderzoek een sterke samenhang met
doorstroomniveau: hoe hoger het VO-niveau waar de groep 8-leerlingen naartoe gaan, hoe
beter hun prestaties voor Engels.
Toch presteren zeker niet alle vvto-leerlingen beter dan alle EIBO-leerlingen, en ook
niet alle vvto-scholen beter dan de EIBO-scholen. Uit het onderzoek blijken grote verschillen
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
71
in toetsresultaten tussen scholen onderling, die wellicht samenhangen met verschillen tussen
programma’s. Ook daarbij kan zowel de omvang van het programma een rol spelen (aantal
minuten per week, en verdeling over groep 1 t/m groep 8) als de invulling van het programma
(gebruikte methode en materialen, taalvaardigheid en didactische kwaliteiten van de
leerkracht). Hier is nog nader onderzoek voor nodig.
De onderzoeken tonen niet aan of vroeg beginnen (vanaf groep 1) tot betere resultaten
leidt. De hogere taalvaardigheden van de vvto-leerlingen kunnen even goed het gevolg zijn
van de grotere totale omvang van het programma als van een vroegere start. Het zou
interessant zijn om de prestaties van leerlingen uit een intensiever programma in de
bovenbouw (bv. 2 uur per week vanaf groep 5) te kunnen vergelijken met een minder
intensief programma vanaf de onderbouw (bij voorbeeld 1 uur per week vanaf groep 1).
Opvallende verbanden zijn ook gevonden tussen attitude en taalvaardigheden, en
tussen buitenschools taalcontact en taalvaardigheden. Onduidelijk is of een positievere
attitude leidt tot hogere taalvaardigheid, of dat een hogere taalvaardigheid leidt tot een
positievere attitude. Ook de hoeveelheid buitenschools taalcontact kan zowel oorzaak als
gevolg van een hogere taalvaardigheid zijn. Het bevorderen van een positieve attitude en van
buitenschools taalcontact lijkt sowieso zinvol; zowel vvto-scholen als reguliere EIBO-scholen
kunnen proberen daar een stimulerende rol in te spelen.
Lesley Anne Goes 3213854
MA-thesis
72
Bronnen
Berkel, A. van, K. Philipsen & M. Feuerstake (2013). Spellingtoets Engels voor de groepen 7
en 8 van vvtoE-scholen. Rotterdam: Early Bird en Europees Platform.
Expertgroep Doorlopende Leerlijnen Taal en Rekenen (2008) Over de drempels met taal. De
niveaus voor de taalvaardigheid. Enschede: SLO.
Geurts, B. & de Graaff, R (te verschijnen). In A. Corda, K. Philipsen & R de Graaff (red.),
Handboek vvto. Bussum: Coutinho.
Heesters, K., Feddema, M., van der Schoot, F., & Hemkers, B. (2008). Balans van het Engels
aan het eind van de basisschool 3; uitkomsten van de derde peiling in 2006. Arnhem:
Cito.
Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap (2006). Besluit Kerndoelen Basisonderwijs
2006. Den Haag: Sdu. (via http://www.minocw.nl)
Thijs, A., Tuin, D., & Trimbos, A. (2011). Engels in het basisonderwijs: verkenning van de
stand van zaken. Enschede: SLO.