r 987
TESOL OUARTERLYV
. o l .2 1 . N o .4 , D e c e m b e 1
Age and Rate of Acquisition of
SecondLanguagefor
Academic Purposes
VIRGINIA P. COLLIER
CeorgeM ason Unirsersitg
Thc study reported in this article analyzed the k'ngth of tinle
requirt'd for 1,548 advantaged limited English proficicnt (LllP)
prclficient in linglish for acadernic lturp<lstrs
students to bercorner
while receiving instmction in English in all subject areas.Variables
included were ag() on arrival, Finglish proficienc'y lcvcl upon
arrival, basic literacy ancl rnath skills in the nativt' languagt' ultrtn
arrival, ancl nurnber of ycars of schooling in English. Second
language and content-area achievcntent were measrtred by
studernts'perfornranccon the Science RcsearchAssociatestestsin
reading, language arts, nrathernatics,science, and social sttrclies.
The results indicatcd that LllP studcnts who cnttrrecl thc ESL
recluiring2-5 years
prograrn at agesti-11wcrc therfastestachicverrs,
to reach the 50th pcrcentile on national nornls in all tht' subject
areas testercl.LEP students whu crrtered the prtlgrarn at ages 5-7
were l-3 years behincl the perfornlance lcvel of their LEP lteers
who cnterreclthe program at agersB-ll, whcn both grorrpshad ther
sarne length of rcsiclence.Arrivals at ages l2-15 experienced thc
greatest difficulty and were projected to recluirt' as nrtrch as 6-8
ycars to reach gracle-levcln<trrnsin acadcrnic achievttrncntwhen
schcloleclall in the serconcllanguage. Whcreas some groups lltay
reach proficiency in some subjects in as little as 2 ycars, it is
for all ages of
projected that at least 4-8 years may be rer<luirecl
LEP students to reach national srade-ltrvcl nornls of nativc
s p e a k c r s i n a l l s u t r j e c t a r t - ' a so f l a n g u a g e a n d a c a d e r t r i c
achicvement, as rneasuredon standardizcd tests.
Acquiring a second language is never easy. Some people would
like to think it is fairly sirnple for young children, but second
language acquisition (SLA) researchers have documentecl a very
complex process that occurs over a long period of time
(Mclaughlin, 1984). First language acquisition begins at birth and
6t7
continuesthrough at least age ).2,rvith continuing acrluisitionof new
vocabulary and subtletiesof the languagethroughoui our adult lives
(de Villiers & de Villiers, 1979).
Second language is acquired to varying degrees of proficiericy
depending on the context in which the acquirer need.sto use it.
Immigrants of school age rvho rnrrstacquire a second language in
the context of schooling 'eed to clevckrp f,ll profic,ieniy iir all
language domains (incltrding the struct'rt's :tnd serna'rtic,s,f
phonetics,phonology, inflectionalrnrlrlthology,syntax,vocabrrlary,,
discourse,pragmatics, ancl paralinguistics)and all language ski[ls
(listening,speaking,reacling,rvritirrg,anclrnetalinguisticknorvleclge
of the language) for rrse in all thr. content are:rs(langrragearts,
rnathematics,science,:rnrl socialstrrclit's).
Langrrageuseclin sc,hool
is-sornetirnesttttiqtreto that c'ontcxt,ancl it bec,rlrnesinc,rt'usirrgly
abstract as stuclentsrrrove frorn one graclt' to the next. l,arrg.r,rg,'i,
the focus of t'very c,ontent-areatask, with all rnt'urrinq anrl all
dernonstrationof knowlcdge expressecltlrrough oral urrtl rvrittt'n
[ r l r r r r so I l a r r g r r a g e .
(lumrnins (1979, 1980, t98la, 198Ib) proprsecl unt' rf tht' first
theoretical rnoclels for SLA that tlistinguishecltrctrvrrt'rrtwo busic,
tylles of languageproficiencv. In carly frlnnulatiorrsof his tht'or-v,
(,-trrnminslabelecl thest' basic irrterpersorralc<lnrrnrrnicativt'
skills
(BICIS)and cognitivt' acaclerniclanguagt'profic,it'nc'1'
(OALI)).'l'hc
use of theseacrtlnyrnshas been rlrrestiorrecl
bv sorrrt'rt'st'archt'rs(see
Cumnrins & Swain, 1983; I.)rlelskyet al., l98i]; Rivera, 1984) us
possibly letadirtgto tttisinterprt'tation of the cornltk'x concr'1ltsthat
they actually represent,brrt thc tt'nns have becornt'svrrrlrrilic,
arrrl
for
tnittty
our
fielcl
as
a
wav,,f
c[istirrgrrishing
lltrttpk'in
-tttelaningful
between face-to-face co'vcrsatio.al proficie.cr' (Bl(lS) ancl
context-rt'cluccd, c'ognitively' clernanclingaspccts of languagt'
proficiency (CIALP).
Itl context-ernbcdded,face-to-fa(l('c'onunurric,ation.
rneunirrqc.an
be negotiated ancl is enhanceclwith a 'vidt' range uf paralinguistic.
and situatirlnalcues.(llntext-retluct'cl oral ancl lvritten lanquagt'.orr
t h c < l t h e rh a r r t l .r c l i e s l l r i r l , l t r i l l o r r l i r r g r r i s t i t ' r . r r cl os r r r c l r r r i r r g .
c-lummins (1981b) elaboratt's his conception of these tt'rnrs by
creating four quadrants which best illrrstratt' tht' range ol'
possibilitiesin the BI(iS arrd (lAl,P distinc,tion.'l'he rluaclrantsarc
divided by a horizotttal corrtinrrurnfr<lrn c,ontert-eirllecltlt'<l
to
context-reduced ancl by a vertical contirlrum frorn cognitively
undernanding to cognitively clerrnanding.
- Language proficiency recluireclfor school tasks can incorporate
the whole range of skills in all four cluaclrants,
but it is especiallyin
s c h o o l t h a t s t u c l e n t s n e e c l t o d e v e l o p c o n t e x t - r e c l r r c e da n d
618
l ' F , s)(t . ( l i r A I t ' l E t i l , \
cognitively demanding aspects of language in order to function
successfully in the classroom. In his continuing refinement of the
BICS/CALP distinction,Cummins (198a)defines CALP as aspects
of language that involve cognitive processesat the higher levels of
Bloorn's taxonomy of educational objectives for the cognitive
d o m a i n : a n a l y s i s , s y n t h e s i s ,a n d e v a l u a t i o n ( s e e B l o o m &
Krathwohl. 1977).
Analyzing rate of attainrnent of CALP in the sercondlanguage,
Curnrnins (1981a) found that rvhereasit generally takes students 2
years to rnaster BICS in the L2, young children with little or no
fornral schooling in their Ll require approximately 5-7 years to
reach the level of native speakersin CIALP in the L2, as rrreasuredort
standardized tests. (,'urnmins (1gti1b) enrphasizes that older
children's cornn)on underlying proficirucy in their first and seconcl
language assistswith the process of SLA. f'hrrs, for oldcr stuclertts,
rlr:rr)yacarlernic skills ancl conct'pts acquired in the Ll transfer to
the L2, and thc process of SLA occurs at a faster rate than for
younger chilclren.
Sunrrnariesof the litcraturc or) aqe and rate of attainment of thcr
L2 (Krashen, Long, & Scarcella, 1979;Krashe'n,Scarc:ella,& Lortg,
1982) confirrn that olclcr children and adults initially acquire rnany
aspr-cts of the L2 faster than younger childrcn. Ilowever, with
accluisition of prrlnunciaticln and influence of the socioaffcctive
filter (Dulay & Burt, 1978; Krashen, 19f12),adults sornetirnes
experience problernrswith SLA, so that overall, with tirrre, yollnger
acrluirers tenrl to attain higher levels of ltroficienc'y in seconcl
languagesthan thosewho begirr SLA as aclults.
This stucly rvas designed to follow up Orrnrmins'srcsearch ancl
Krashen, Scarcella,and Long's literature synthesison age variables,
rate of attainrtrent,and influence of Ll CIALP developrnent on the
process of L2 CIALP devekrprnent. In this study, (,-urnmins's
theoretical framework was trsr,das a basis for ilnalysisof the type of
L2 lrroficiency necdt-tl for acadentic purposes. The rncasrrres
available for this strrdy, however, w'ere not terststhat assessedall
aspectsof languagcltroficiency.
'l'he
standardizerdtestsrequired only thg language skill of reading
to be able to answer thc questions.Metalinguisticknowledge of the
language was assesseclin the language arts test, ancl ability to
classify, generalize, rnanipulate ideas, problcm solve, ancl apply
knowledge in cach of the content areaswas assessedin the reading,
social studies, science, ancl nrathematics tersts.Measures used thus
assessecl
sorne astr)cc:ts
of L2 CALP devekrprnent as well as contentarea achieverttentof students.Since Curnrnins's(l98la) data were
based on 1,210limitecl English proficient (LllP) students in Grades
A G I . tA N I ) R A l ' F t O F A C Q t r l S l l ' t O N
619
K-9 in Canada, this study sought to extend the literature by
analyzing 1,548LEP students in Crades K-11 in a U.S. context.
METHOD
Sample and Setting
Cross-sectional data from 1977 to 1986 were gathered on
language minority students attending a large U.S. public school
system on the East Coast. At the time of the study, language
nrinority studentsrepresented ll% of the total student population in
this school district. Predominantly an affluent suburban area
connected to a large rnetropolitan hub, the district also included a
few pockets of lou'-income farnilies. Almost all the language
rninority studentsin the district were relatively recent immigrants to
the L]nited States, with over 75 different languages and over 100
different countries represented.
Approximately 65/. of the subset of language minority students
who received special ESL instruction qualified for free or reducedprice lunches, indicating that upon entry, a majority of these
students came from low-incorne farnilies, as measured by U.S.
standards. Ilowever, a large percentage of the immipgant families
who settle in the clistrict corne from an upper or rniddle-income
background in their corrntry of origin, and they bring strong
aspirations of upwarcl rnobility to their new home, with nlany
achieving a rl)ore rniddle-class standard of living in the United
Stateswithin the first l0-15 years of their arrival. Thus, the language
rninority population could best be categorized as lower to rniddle
incortre, with strong rniddle-classaspirations.
In educational background, thc large rnajority of language
rninority students in the district entered school at grade level, with
parents having come from rniddle-classor upper classbackgrounds
in their horne countries. In just the last 3 years, the district has
experiencecl a srnall but increasing influx of language minority
students with little ur no forrnal schooling in their native language.
Subjects for this study, a total of 1,548 students, included all
language rninority students who were placed in beginning-level
ESL classesupon entry ancl rernained in the school systern for
several years. One subset of this population was not included in the
study, those students who tested below grade level in Ll skills
during placernent testing upon entry, as well as older studentswith
little or no forrnal schooling in LI.
Tfiis study was restricted to a group of LEP students with these
particular characteristicsfor two reasons.First, it was assumedthat
620
TESOL QT..TARTERLY
an "advantaged" group of LEP immigrants, those with a middle- to
upper class background in their home country and a strong
educational background in their Ll, would be more likely to reach
the L2 proficiency and content-areaachievement of native English
speakers faster than LEP immigrants who had a lower class
background or were below grade level in Ll skills. Second, since
the amount of time required to reach L2 proficiency can vary
significantly depending on level of English proficiency at which a
student begins study all in English and level of forrnal schooling in
the LI, it was decided to control for thesetwo variables.
Assessmentfor controlled variables.LIpon entry, a placement-testing
procedure deterrnined students' level of English proficiency and
basic L1 literacy and rnath skills. After a placernent staff member
conductecl an interview with the student and his or her parents or
relatives, the student was given a locally developed placenrent test
to rtteasurelistening, speaking, reading, and writing skills in English
'l'he
ancl ability to clo rnath cornputation.
math tests in basicr
corrrputation, clecirnals,ancl fractions were rvritten rrsing six of the
major variations in rvrlrld notations of math syrnbols. For
rneasurementof basic literacy in the Ll, the student was askeclto
reacl a short paragrallh and to u,ritt'a short language sample in the
native language. 1'he plac'ernentcente'rstaff hacl ma.terialsin each
languagetu rnakc a rough juclgrtrentthat the sttrdenthad had at least
s<lrrtertrinirnal forrnal training in tht'Ll.
llilirrgtral staff lvere
available to arralyze irt rnore clepth Sltanish, Viertnantese,and
Kttreanlartguagt'sarn1lk,s,
which were anlong the largestrtrinority
languagegroul)sof the district.
A decision to place a stuclent bckrw gradt: levcl rvas basecl on
ability to producc a shurt LI w'riting sanrpleanclability'to perforrn
rnath c'alcrrlationsat gracle level frlr the strrtlt'rrt'sage. A third
c'ritcrion for gracle ltlacernent was a student's transc'ripts,which
u'orrld inclit'att:intt'rnrllted or little forrnal schooling or very klw
gratle point ar.'t'ragt'.I'lacernerrt staff had erxternsive
refererrcesto
cortdrrcttranscriptanulvsis.Studtrntswere rarely placed rnortrtharr
one graclt'lcvr'l bekrlv their age-apl)ropriategradt'.
Characteristicsof sample chosen. Stuclentsin the advantaged LI,iP
sarrrple c'hosen for this stucly exhibitcd the following rnajor
characteristicsuport arrival and entry into schooling all in linglish:
(a) They rvere frorn ovt'r 100 clifferent countries and spuke over 75
clifft'rr:nt languages,with no single languagepredominant, althotrgh
Spanish, Korearr, ancl Vietnanrese speakersrepresenteclthtr largcrst
language groul)s; (b) the stuclentswere of l<lwer to rnidclle-class
bac'kgrorrrtrl,
as rtreasurecl
by [J.S.economic standlucls,
brrt they ]racl
A G I . t, { N t ) I i A ' l f t o F A C ( . ) t r l s t l ' t o N
621
strong middle-class aspirations and had come from middle- or
upper classbackgrounds in their home countries; (c) they had little
or no proficiency in English; and (d) they were at or close to grade
level in academic skills in their L1. In social class and educational
background in their home country, these LEP students would be
expected to have an advantage over their LEP peers who carne
from lower classbackgrounds or those who had had internrpterdor
little forrnal schooling.
ESLprogram characteristics.In this school systern, once each LEI'
stuclent was tested and placed in the apprupriate gracle level, the
student was given special assistancefrom ESL teachers, who
provided English langtragearts instruction appropriately structrrrecl
and serluencedto builcl a studerrt'sproficiency level in English.
Since there were no self-containeclFISL classes,stuclentsspent ortly
part of their day rvith specialized ESL teachersand the rest of the
clay in the rnainstrearn classroorn. ESL staff assisteclrvith thtr
developrncnt of BI(IS in linglish. as wt'll as rvith CALP clt'vcloprnent with srlrneinstmction in the c'ontt'ntareas.A ft'u'liSl, contentarea classt:s(FISL algebra, ESL biokrgy, etc.) r.veretaught at the
seconcl:rrylevel. Stuc'lentsclid not rt.c't'ivt'an1,forrnal instnrction in
their l,l at school.
Studentswere taught by IISL staff trntil staff nrernbersfelt thel'
corrlclfrrnction full-tirne in tht'rnainstrearn.Iior exit frorn the ESL
prograrn, stuclentswt'rt' aclrninisteredthe (lalifornia Achievernt'rrt
1'est (OTl3/Mc(lraw'-llill, 1986),ancl FISL staff ratccl tht'nr on a
l<lcally'devekllrecl scale f oc'using on stuclents'11s1,1:loprnent
in
Finglishof oral conrprcht'nsiorr,
<lralexpressi<ln,
rearlingancllvriting
skills,an<lstuclyhabits.Most studcntsrvcrt'gcnerallynrairrstrt'urnr.cl
frttrn the FISL llrogranr within 2-l) years of t ntry into the school
systcrrt.Mainstrearningclid not irnply that tlrt' FISL staff belit'vcrl
that strrdentshad achievecl (lAl,t' in F)nglish brrt that tht'y wt're
sufficiently'l'ar alortg in their grou,th in (IALP skills irr Finglishto
contirtuetheir developrnt'ntin a nrairntrearnclass.
ResearchQuestions
l. lklrv rnany yearsuf schoolingallin F)nglishure retluireclfur LEI'
studcnts' achievementin rt'ading, langrragearts, social sturlitrs,
sciencr'. artcl ntatht'rnatics trl reach nati<lnal av('raq(' scores of
nutive English spcakt:rsat each graclelevel?
2. Ilow,strongly does age on arrival of LFll'students infhrcnc'r:the
rate of acquisition of cognitivr: acaclenic scc'oncl language
uroficiertcv artd content-art'aachievernent?
622
I t ' l ' t , t LR\
]'ESOL QT.'A
Data Collection and Anallsis
Cross-serctionaldata from the years 1977-1986for all students
exited from the ESL program were collected to analyze age on
arrival ancl rate of attainrnent of some aspectsof CALP in English
and content-areaachievement.Dependent variables were scoresfor
C r a d e L e v e l s 4 , 6 , 8 , a n d 1 1 o n t h c S c i e n c eR e s e a r c hA s s o c i a t e s
(SRA) AchievementSeries(ScienceResearchAssociates,1978)tests
of reading, language arts, social sttrdies,science,ancl mathematics.
T'estingu'as d<tneonly in English. Independent variablesincluded
age on arrival ancl nurnber of years of schooling all in English,
which for this sarnple was ecluiv:rlerrtto length of re.sidencein the
[initccl Statt:s. Ll literacy and rnath skills on arrival ancl English
proficicncy levt'l on arrival wert' controlleclvariablcs.
School rec'orcls,available on rnachine-readablemt clia, were trsed
'l'he
to constnrc't the clata set.
initial data tape consistccl of
infortnation rln all LEI) sturlentsrvho wcrt'plar:eclin FISL,irrcluding
thcir age on arrival, length of rcsidence, sex. ltrirnary larrguage,
plact:rnent scores, anrl grade lervel in whir,h thev wt're initially
plat't'd.'fhesc recurcls rvere checked for crrors by running
cotttltttter I)rogralns that rtotecl unrrsualancl obviorrsly incorrect
etttrit's rvhttsevalut's t'xceecleclthe norrrralupp('r anrl krwer bouncls
for that variablc (t'.g., an uge of fi). In arklition, tht conrputer
prograrlls nOtt'clinc'Orrsistenc'it's
arn<lngthe clata for a partic'ular
s t r r r l e r r(te . g . ,a s t u r l e n to f a g e l 6 i n ( l r a c l e 2 ) . ' l ' h e s t ' c r r o r s w e r e
t u l r r r r n r l ltt' rl r r t ' r ' t t ' t l .
F i l t ' s o f S R A t e s t d a t a f o r C l r a d e s , 1 , 6 , 8 ,a n r l l l u , t ' r t ' a v a i l a b l e
frortr thc vears 1982-19u6.other files were available frorn lg771981,but since clifferent fornrs of therSRA test u,t'rc rrseclin those
years, the scorescorrlrl not bc crlrnl;areclwith those frorn tht'new
fornr. A set of relational clata-basecornputt'r prograrrrs wils
ernpklved to fincl tcst score rnatc,hesfrurn approxirnately 160,000
tt'stingrccorclsfrlr each of alrprorirrurtely14,000stuclentswho hatl
rt.gistert:clfor I|SL classt's.Aftcr only those strrclentsrvho entered at
thc beginning levt'l of EsL ltrofic,ierrcyancl who were at gracleleverl
in Ll literac',v
uncl rnath skills had brcn selecttrl ancl thosesturlents
rvh<lhacl ttttt retttaineclirr the schoul systenrhad beerr elirninated,
1,548 LI'IP students rernained in the data file rvith krngituclinal
recortls (4-6 years) of school perforrnancrr.
\\,'ith this clatafile, clatast:tswe:rerconstructed consistint{of all t}rer
strrdentswho hacl bet'n tested in a given grade for a given number
ol venrs after ESL registration,resulting irr a total of 17 different
groul)s. Flilch of the l7 groups varierclaccording to the three
variablt:s of length of resiclernce,
agr) on arrival, ancl grade level
4 , ( ; EA N t ) R A ' i l , t O F A ( ; ( . ) ( r t S I l t O N
623
rvhen the SRA test was taken. The variable of number of years of
schoolilg all in English was defined by the following grouping of
nronths:-12-23-otrihr (labeled 1-2 years in the following figures),
24-35months (2-3 years),36-47months (3-4 years), 48-59months (4of years.f
5 years), and'60-71 .ronths (5-6 years). The n-um]lg'-r
prograln as
ESL
in
the
scirooling all in English included tirne spent
well as titne spent in the rnaittstream.
Arl1;ng the^17 groups, there rvere no significant differettces in
educatioiral backgrouncl, in level of English proficiency uport
arrival, 6r in prclpgrtional reltresentation gf ser and language
background. T;ble. I presentsthergeneral pattem of representation
of sei and lang.age liackgr.,nd within the sarnple acrossthe four
qrade levcls tested.
't'AIll.E
I
Percentagc of Samplc in Eac'h(iradc by S't'x irnd Languagc llackground
(;radc
Spanish
Victnamcsr
Korean
Farsi
(lhincst'
Khmer
ho
I lrdu
Japancst'
Arabic
( )ther
'Iirtal
t'l
l7
l6
l-r
5>
.1
I
rl
;]
.t
17
l(x)
Ianguagcbackground
2l
20
2l
1
3
20
lll
l9
20
))
2i
t)
6i
.l
i]
(,
.t
l:i
2
.J
3
2
ti]
I (X)
.{
I-r
2
I
2
I
I (X)
.1
I
ll
t(x)
5('X
Fcmale
Malc
'l'otal
19
4li
4lJ
I (X)
I (X)
l(x)
11
I (X)
F-or t'ach Of these i{roltl)s, the rnr:ansand standard deviations ol
the scaled stantlartl ,,,,,."i in the achievtlttttlnttest areasof reading,
languagt' arts, social studies, science, ancl rnathelnatics were
corrrputecl.ln addition, c:onficlenceintervals for the Ineans werc
calculatetl. The rneansare displayed in graphs for each subtest and
fur each grade ttrstecl(sch69l system nlean scoresare also given).
Tht rntiarrswere graphically representedby converting the Inean
standarcl scores irito norrrial ctrrve erquivalents (NCEs), for
.I'ESOL
QTIARl'EIILY
appropriate interval-lt'vel scaling' NCEs are- the appropriate
equi.raierrtof ltercentilesto trsewhen displaying the resultsin graph
frxrn because-a NCE is a conversion of the percentile into equalinterval data. I-jnlike percentiles,NCEs are preferred for statistical
analysisbecausearithmetical operations can be perforrnecl only ott
e.qual-intervalscales( Iallrnadge, 1976).
ihe n.,tnber of casesfor each group ranged frorn 2l (for 3 .ut of
l7 groups) to 15l. or ill) averag(' of 74 ller group, pr-crvidinga largc
etr,,,reh-nttnrber f6r testing f9r stiltistical significance in the
diffeiences betweett groul)s. The sc'hotllsystt:rnconrllarison grorlp
(whic,hincludecl both riativt: speakersand f SL grircluates)consistecl
irf an itvt,rage of 9,258stuclt'rtfseach year for each grade level.
As a gengrll guiclelinertr this study, by cgrnltrrtingcgnficlence
intervals. it rvas i'ountl that a difference btrtweert grotll) ttrtl:rtrstlf 67 N(lEs rvas strffic'ientftlr sigrtificanctrat tht' .05 lcvel evert itt the
srnallt'stof groups. Irt stlrnt' cases,!{rorll) clifferentrt'sof ll-4 NCEs
r v e r e s i q n i f i c a n t ^ atth e . 0 l l e v e l . B e c ' a L r .tsl fe t h t ' l a r g t ' n t r t l r b e r o f
groltl)stu bt' cornparecl(17 groups tlf LEI' student,s,
llltrs'1gr<lttllstlf
riative speakt'rs, tinrt's 5 srrbiec'tttreas, or 105 groul;s - ttltal),
sigrrificancett'sts for t'ach possitrlecrrntparisttrlwcre ttttt 1tt'rfrlrmecl
clueto the high probabilit,vof rttrtking'fype I errors.Orrlr''irtrportant
r'ornparisons\\'r'r(.rtrade urtclart' rt'lttlrtcd ht'rc.
RESL]I,TS
St'vt'ralfairll' r.onsisterrt
ltatternsin scorirtgulnol)g the grtlulls tlf
graclrratei
as
analysis of the clata rvas c'ortclttctecl.
t'rttergetl
FisL
Thesr' ltattents are rt'ptlrtetl by foc'usittg tln cliffcrenc't'sallrollg
groul)sbv (a) lertgth6f resiclence,(b) agt' 9n arrjval, (c) gracle-lt:vel
r i c h i i ' v t ' r i r t ' n t( b y g r a c l e v n ' h c nt e s t e d ) , a n d ( d ) s u b j e c ' t - a r e a
achievt'rrrcnt.
Lcngth ofResidence
For LFIP sttrdgntsin this stptly, the ntttnber of vears 9f their allEnglish schooling ,uvaserirral tg their length gf resiclt'ncein the
tlrrite d States. Results ait' reportetl using tht' terrn length of
with gther studit'sttsing similar
rt'sirltttce(l,OR) to bt' c'ottsistt'nt
variablt's.
For over half of the c'ottrltarisonsbetweelr groups by LOR, the
mor(' years of all-Flnglish schooling they hacl, the higher LEI'
stuclerrtsin the sartreqrtrde scoretl on the SRA tests.The increasein
scor€)sthat each gr()ul) ac'hieveclwith each aclditionalyear's LOR
wiis very small ancl in rtrost cases nrlt statistigally significant.
Ilowcvei, in 15 out of 16 cornplrisons(with the exceptionof certain
A ( ; t t A N I ) R A ' t ' l lO ! ' A C Q t r l S l ' f l ( ) N
groups,to be discussed),groups with LOR of 4-5 yearsachieved2-8
NCEs higlier than groups with LOR of 1-2 years.In 10 out of 16 of
these comparisons, groups scored at least 4 NCEs higher, ir
significant increaseoverall. Exceptions to this genernl pattern were
S-year-old arrivals tested in fourth grade, 6- and 7-year-old a"rrivals
tested in sixth gracle,l2-year-olcl arrivals tested in eighth grade, ancl
rnathematicsachit'vernentacrossall gracles,which are all discussr.d
in later sections.
F'igrrresl-4 illustrate ESl, gradrr:rtes'acaclemic achievernent on
the SIIA tests, cornparing subject-areaachievementb1, lengttr of
residenceanclage'on arrival frlr each grade at which stuclents'nvcrt'
testecl. Iieltrtrterl btlt,u eac,lr figrrrt' art. school sy,sternrlleuns.
rartgingfrom the 59th to the Tlst NCFls.with a mean of 6,1N(lFls for
the school systenra(,rossall subject :rreasancl graclt's.
An erarnltle of tht' ltattt'rrr of slightly' highcr achieverncnt w'itlr
t'ach grorrlt's ackltd -vcaro[ LOR can be st'r'n in Figrrre I in foLrrth
gr:tclers'rt'atling, llrrrgrragt'arts, arrrl social strrcliessc,or('s,frtr
'l'he
strrdt'nts\\'ith LOII of l-4 vcars.
5--vcar-olclilrrivals, with LOR
of 4-5 y('ars,rlicl not nraintain the pattern ancl rvere a spt'cial cas€',to
lte disc'usst'cl
shrlrtly. I,'orrrth-gradeLI,ll' stuckrntsscoreclat thc .16th
NCIFIin rt'urling rvhen lirst aclrnirristerecl
thc SItA tt'st at l-2 vt'ars'
l,OR, arrdtlrt'groul) rvith lJ-'ly('ars'LOR had rt'acheclthe 5lst XC;1,,
slightly'allorrt' tlre national avt'rugt'.Soc'ialstrrclit'suntl langrragcarts
scor-('colnparisonsbt'trvet'nthe slrrnetvu'o[,OIi grolll)swert'highrrr
bv trvo N(lFls (at the 52nrl N(lFl in socriulsturlicsanrl thr'57th NCFI
in lurtguagearts),not a statistic,ally'
significantrliffertnc,t'.
I'-igrrre2 ilhrstratessirth graders' scores,which clt'rnonstratetht'
pattern ('ven nlore c,onsistentlyirr reacling,langrragearts. sr.it'rrct',
'l'lre
artd s<lciltlstrrdit'sacltit'vt'ntent.
6- anrl 7-vt'ar-olrlarrivals lvitlr
LOR of 4-5 vr.arsancl 5-6 !('ars r('slx'ctirt'lr rlicl rr,rt rrrairrtainthe
'l'he
pattern antl are cliscrrssecl
grorrp in thc sixth gratlt' w,ith
slrortly.
Loll of l)-'1years increasecltheir scuresovt:r the groul) rvith Loli of
1-2 yearsby, 5 NCEs on the rt'ading tcst (reachingtlrt'5lst NCE), 6
N(lEs irt languagcarts (at tht'62ncl NCllt), .1N(lEs in socialsttrclit's
(at the 59tlr NCE), arrd 4 NCIEsin sc'iencrr
(at the 58th N(lll).
F-igurt'lJillustratcsa sinrilar pattt'rn for eighth graclers,u,ith the
ercclrtion of the 12-1,ear-olcl
arrir.'als,another sllecial case to be
rliscussedlatcr. In cornparing the cighth-grarkrgroul) $,ith LOR of
2-13ye:rrswith the group with LoR of ,1-5ycars, tcst scoresincrcasctl
by 3 NOFIsin readirrg(reachingthe 47th NCIE),4 N(lFls in languagt'
arts (at the 54th N(lli), 6 NCIEsin social strrclies
(ar the 5uth NCE),
ancl3 N(lEs in scienc,t'(at the 5lst NCE).
F'igtrre4 shows little clifference arnong grolrps tested i' the I lth
grade with l,OR of l-2, 2-iJ,ancl l)-4 yerars,but studerrtsin thc group
626
1'l.ts()Q
L t Att't'F)tt,)
with LOR of -1-5 .vears increasecl their scores significantlf in
conrparison u'ith those of 1-2 -vears'LOR, u'ith an increaseof 8
N(lEs in reacling(reachingthe lllst NCE), 7 NCEs in lartguagearts
(at the.l2nclNCIE),:) NCEs in socialsturlies(at the l38thNCF-), ancl
7 NCllis in sc'ionct'(at the llTth NCIF.).
\\'hen conrpareclu,ith national averagesat the 50th \(lti overall,
[,li[' strrclcntsu'ith tg(' on arrival bt'kr*' age 12 appeart'rl to be
rttakirtg goocl yrrogressrvithirr their first 2 1't'ars of all-F,nglish
sr'ho<lling.flv the enclof 2 t'r'ars'l,OR, all groups rvith agc rtn arrir''al
ol 6-ll harl rcacht.<lut lt'ast thr' 5>0thN(lll on thc lunguagt' arts,
soc'iulstuclics.unclrrratht'rnatic's
k'sts.(AIthough onh' clatafor 8- uncl
10-y'r'ar-olrl
arrivals art'shou'n in the figrrreslrlr LOII of l-2 vt'ars,
this stutt'rttt'rttis bascrl orr thc assrrrttptionthat i1 the pattt'rrt ol
irtc'rcust's
in sc'rlrt'srernaint'rlc'rlnsistt'rrt,
6-. 7-, 9-. arrrl ll-r,'eirr-olcl
arrivuls u.'orrlclulso havc rt'ac'lrt'tltht' 50tlr pt'rc't'ntilt'w'ithirr l-2
1 ' t ' a r s .l)' h t ' 6 - t o I l - y e a r - o l c li r r r i v a l st c s t e c li n t l t t ' f o r r r t hu n c ls i x t l t
grarleshacl also rerrc'ht'cl
thcir first 2
thr'50th \(ll'l irr sc'it'rrc't'r'u'ithirr
y('ars LOR, u,hereastlrost'tt'steclirr t'ighth grarle reuc'ltt'tlthe 5lst
NOI'l b1-,1-5
) t ' a r s ' l , O l t . O n t h t ' r t ' a r l i r t gt t ' s t ,t h o s t ' t t ' s t t ' ci nl f o r r r t l t
a r t r ls i r t l t g r a t l t ' sr t ' a c ' l r e tchl r ' 5 l s t N ( l l ' l a t t h e t ' n r lo f l l - ' 1 r ' r ' a r s ' l , O R .
b r r t t h o s e t t ' s t c r li r r t ' r g l r t l rg n r t l t ' h a r l o r r l r ,r t ' u c ' l r t ' t l r t ' 4 7 t h N ( l l i
yt'ars' L( )ll .
luftt'r,1-,'r
A l t h o r r g hs o n r ( ' s r o u p so f l , M ) s t u c l c n t sa t l t l l g r u t l t ' l t ' r . ' t ' lhs u r l
rt'ac'lrccl
tht' 50th NOF, (tht' nationalavcragt') on sonl('srrbjcct-urcu
tt'sts u'itlrirr tlrt'.1-5\'('arslrr('usrrrt'cl
irr this sturlr, rrlrt'rrc'rlrttllttrt'tl
u'ith the ar'hicvt'rncrrtlt'r t'ls of rrativt'speakt'rsirr tlrt'ir krc'alschool
tlistric't,LFll) strrrlt'ntsharl rrot vt't lrt'grurto rt'aclrtlrt'sc'hools1'stt'ttt
rI)('ansac'rossgraclt'lt'r,t'lsol 62-{14N(ll'ls irr rt'acling,62-6,1
N(ll',s irr
l a r t g u i t g t ' u r t s , 6 0 - 6 lN
l ( l F , s i n s o c ' i a ls t u c l i t ' su. r r c l5 9 - 6 4 N ( l l ' l s i n
sc'i('1rc'('.'l'he
h ri r c l . l o r t l r t ' r r r o s t p u r t , r r r t ' t a r r r l t ' r c ' t ' l l t ' r rl r a t i v t '
spt'itkt'rs'aclticvcrtrt'rrtirr rrrlrtlrt'rrratic's,
in u.'hic'htht'st'lrool svst('nl
rIr('arrrangccllrorrr 62 toi I N(lFls a('rossall grudt' lt'r t'ls.
Age on Arrival
As c'attbe set'nirt liigrrrt'1, u gra<lrralrrpu,alrltrt'rrrlilr scort'sfor
t'ac'h grorrp u,'itlr arr urlrlitional I't'ar's LOR rvas cvitlrlt on tlrt'
rt'itclirtg,larrgrragt'
arts, arrclsot'ialsturlit'stt'sts.Orrlv tht' ,-;-1,t'ar-olcl
arrivals, u,lto lurtl bt't'rr irr the tl.S. longer thun tht'other forrrtltgratlt' groul)s, cliclnot ac'hit'r'eat a levt'l t'r1tec'tctllrlr their lerrgth of
resiclt'rtt't'.'l'htst'stuclt'nts
sc'ort'rl6 N(lF,s l<lrveron tht'reatlirrg tcst
thtrrrtht'6-r,'r'ar-olcl
arrivuls,u,ho harl I I'r'ark'ss LOll, rcachirrgonly
the '15thN(ll'], ,1 N(lF,s lorver irr lungrurgearts at the 5llrcl N(lFl, 9
\ ( ; t , t . \ N I ) l i A ' l H o l , ' \ c ( ) t I S t ' lt o N
62?
FIGI.]RE I
FI(;TIR-L 2
Age on Arrival ( AOA ), Length of Residcnce ( l-OR ), and
Subjcct-ArcaAchievcmcnt for 4th-Grade SRAScores
Agc on Arriral (AOA), Length of Residence (l-OR),:md
Subiect-AreaAchievement for 6th-Grade SRA kores
3
L!
(
! rrrt
.a
I
>
*.
,t'.
7
-.-
)(,
.'
t-
v
l-'
9
f
=-li,-t'
.A*
- l'-
\l\
-\i6-^*
50
l-.. *
--'if{
L-'
L
2+o
z
A _ __ _ _-A.
*..
...*
-..l-.
I
A - - - - -,-A
A()A
L()R
ti
I -2 ws.
'i0
Reading
hnguagcans
S{)cialstudics
St'icnce
l'\,lathenratrcs
7
2,.1lrs.
6
.l-4 r,rs.
5
.i-5 rrs.
N ( ) t c i S ( 1 1 ( ) os l\ s t ( ' n tr n ( ' a r )Iso r . l t l r g r l r < l t ' \ \ ' ( ' r:rl \s f o l l o r rs :
r t , a r l i r r g ( j 2 1l a r r g r r i r g ca r t s 6 i l : s o c i a l s t r r < l i t ' s 6 0 :
s c i t ' r r t ' , = r 9u; r a t l r t ' r r l r t i t ' s 6 2 .
A()A
L()R
lo
l -2 \-rs.
r)
2 Jlrs
tt76
l--1 lrs.
.i-5 rrs.
5'6 urs
N o 1 ( S c h o r t l s t s t e r r r r r r t ' a n sf o r 6 t l r g r a r l t , \ \ ' ( ' r ( ' a s f o l l o u s : r t , l r r l i r r g 6 2 ; l a n g u a g t 'a r t s ( r 1 1s o t i : r l s t r r t l i t ' s 6 5 ; s t , i t , r r c . t ,6 . 1 ;
r n l r t l r t ' r r r : r t i t s7 0 .
a
'z
P
FIGT]RE ]
ftctiRr 4
Agc on Arival (At)A), Length of Residence (l.OR), urd
Subiect-Arca Achicvcmcnt for 8th-Grade SIIA Sc'orcs
Age on Ariral (A()A). I.cngth of Residcnce ( L()R ), and
Subicct-Arca Achievemcnt for I lth-(iradc SR{ Sc'orer
-
5
-;
-
! r,tl
',/
.a
I
-.-
> )t,
2+o
z
A()A
|2
l.()R I 2 rrs
l!
lt
2-J rrs.
lo
.l ,i rrs.
()
4 5 \.rs
N t l t c : S c l r o o l s ) .s t ( ' l l ) u I ( ' a r ) s f o r l i t h g r a t l c x c r t r r s f o l l o u s
rt'atlirrg fi,l; larrgrragt'arts
fi,l: social strrtlit's 6,'r
s c i c n t t ' 6 l J :r r r a t h c r n l r t r c s 7 L
A()A 15
I-()R I 2 \'rs.
l{
2 I rrs.
l.l
.l-.i rrs.
t2
-:i,5\Ts.
N o t t : S ch r i o l s \ s t ( ' n r l r ) ( ' i r r r sl o r I I t l r g r a t l t ' n r l c l r s
lollorr s: rt'irtling fi.l; lrrrgrrirgt' arts 62. soc,i:rl
s t r r r l i c s 6 ( ) ;s t i t ' r r c r ' 6 l ; r r r r t h t ' r r r i r t i c sf i 7 .
NCEs lower in social studies at the 43rd NCE, 3 NCEs lower in
science at the 49th NCE, and 4 NCEs lower in mathematics at the
59th NCE.
A similar pattern was found in the scores on the sixth-grade test
for 6- ancl 7-year-old arrivals, who were also significantly below the
appropriate perfornrance level for their LOR (see Figure 2).
Comparing 7-year-old arrivals with 8-year-old arrivals, who had I
year less LOR, both groups reached the same level on reading (the
5lst NCE) and languagearts (the 62nd NCE). In socialstudies,the
7-year-old arrivals were 3 NCltrs lower at the 56th NCE, in science
3 N(,-Es lowerr at the 55th NCE, and in mathenratics6 NCEs lower
at tht'6|th NCE. Even mure dramatic drops occurred in the scores
of 6-year-old arrivals, who had 2 years more LOR than 8-year-old
arrivals,with scort'sin reading 3 NCEs lower (at the 48th NCE), in
langtragearts 8 NCEs lower (at the 54th NCE), in social studies6
N(lEs lower (at the 5llrd NCE), in sciencetJ NCFIs lower (at the
50th NCIFI),anrl in nratht'nratics14 NCEs lower (at the 60th NCE).
ln ihe eighth gracle (see l'igure l1), l2-year-old arrivals with only
1-2 years'[,OR achieveclat a higher level than ll-yerar-old arrivals
with 2-ll y€)ars'l,OR. [n rcacling,the l2-yo-ar-olclarrivals achieved 1
NOE higher, not a significant differcnc't..In language arts, the two
'l'w,elve-year-old
grolll)s reaclrt-clthe same level.
arrivals' scores in
socialstudieswere 5 N(lFls higher.in science3 NCIEshigherr,and in
ntathernatics5 N(ltrs hiqher.
Gradc-l-evclAchievement
Another consistentltattern in scoresappeared in comparisonsof
achievernt'nt across grade,levels. As can be seen in Figure 4, the
llth-gracle LFIP stuclcnts'test scoreswt:re drarnatically krwer than
LEP stuclents'perforrlrance in 4th, 6th, and flth graders(see Figures
l-3). 1'he llth graders testeclafter 1-2 years of English schooling
scorcrdfrorn the Zlrul to the l]5th N(lFl on reading, language arts,
social strrtlies,ancl sc'ience.After l3-4years, they had rnade r)eager
progress as n)easuredon the SRA. Finally, tht: group with 4-5 years'
LOIi increasccltheir scores by 4-t3NCEs, in comparison with the
group with 3-4 years' LOR, a significant increrase.I.ileventh-grade
ESL graduattrs still apperarr--dt<l neecl several morc-' years of
schooling in English beyoncl the 4-5 years nleasuredhere in order to
reac'h native-speaker levels (50th NCE nationwide and 60th-64th
N(lE for tht' local district).
TFTSOLQLiART'ERLY
Math achievementof ESL graduatesin therllth grade was much
higher than llth-grade achievement in other subject areas,reaching
above national avera!{es(53rd-59th NCEs) but still lower than 4th-,
6th-, and 8th-grade LEP students' math achievernent.The llthgracleschool system nrean in tnathcmatics was at the 67th NCE.
Subject-ArcaAchie'vement
Whcn conrparingsubject-areaperfonrtance,Figures1-4 illustrate
high rnathenratics uchievenrent, w.ith LEI' students scoring 3-6
NCIEs abovt- nativc speakersevert in their first 2 years of all-Finglish
schooling,with the exct:lltionof I lth graders,who scttrecl14 NCEs
gt'tterallydicl
bt krw the schoolsysterrrrr)()an.Sc'oresin rrratltt'rtratics
rr<ltvary signific'antlyacross grollps irt t'ach graclc level, reuraining
basically at the sarnehigh levt.l of achit'r,t'rncntwith t'ac'hacltlitional
-v'earof l,OR. Erccptions rvert' tht' 5-year-olrl arrivals' clrops irt
s('or('s on the 4th-grarle tt'st, 6- and 7-vear-olcl arrivals' clrops in
sc()res orr tltr' 6tlr-graclc test, I2-year-olcl itrrivals' better lterfornlanc(' irr c'ornparison with the otht'r 8th-grade i{roups, :rnd the
irrcrt'asccl
ac'hit'vcrncntof the groul) in llth grade with LOR ol 4-5
grorrps
years.All
witlr agt'ort arrival of 8-II y('ilrsscoreclabove the
rt'gardlessof [,OR.
scltoolsysttrrttrnr.anin rttathetnatics,
rt'prt'sentetl
FiSL graclttatt's' highest
\\'hereas rrratherrratics
perforrniutc't'. tht'ir lowt'st sc'or('s*'t'rt' irt reacling. Reatling and
langrragearts u't'rt'the two strbjt'ctart'asclirectly'focusedon testing
krrrrr.vleclqeof L2. Perforrnnrtce itr thest' tr'r.'oareas cliffert,d
st'oring fronr 5-11 NClFlshigher <tnthe
sigrrificantll',u,ith strrclents
langtragt' arts test, lvhic'h rrtt'ttsrrretlprrttctuatitlr, gran)Ittar, ancl
sllelling. I)ifferences in perforn)anc(' ilrnong tlrt' social studies,
sciertt't', artrl langrragc arts tests r'r't'rt' not f or the rtttlst part
signilic'ant.
I)ISCT]SSION
Age on Arrival: 5-7
The rlata in this strrrlyort younger arrivals (ages5-7) appear to
su1;port (,'urnnrins'sthresholclhypothesis (1976) antl his interclepenclenc'ehy'pothesis (1981b), u'hich rlescribes the "corrtrnon
rrrtrlt'rlyingllrofic'icnc'1"'of a stuclent'strv<tlanguages:"T<t the extent
thut instnrc'tionin Lr is effective in prontoting lrroficiency in Lx,
transft'r of this proficiency to Ly will occur provided therre is
atletlrratr' ('xl)osrrr('to Ly (either irt school or envirttnrnent) and
\ ( ; 1 . .A \ l )
lt.\ t l. ( )lj .\( ( )t'lsl'l I()\
6ill
adequate motivation to learn Ly" (p 29). Cummins argues that
common underlying proficiency makes possible the transfer of
cognitive academic proficiency from one language to another. He
suggeststhat there nrust be sorne minirnal literacy development in
the 1,1 for cognitive developrnent to transfer readily to thi: L2 and
that this minirnal "thresholcl" level significantly aids the process of
CALP clevekrpmentin the L2.
The clata in this strrcly suggest that this threshold involves a
rninirnurn of 2 yt:ars of Ll schooling for students' rnost rapid
tr)rogressin ClAl,P development in the L2. Arnong first through
eighth graclers here for severralyears, <lnly arrivals at age 5 who
lvt'rt' trrsterlin forrrth gradt' and arrivals at ages 6 and 7 who were
testeclin sixth gracledicl not achit've at a rate eclualto arrivals at ages
8-I I, u,hen both grorrpshad the sarneLOR.
(,'<lrtservatively'
assrrrrtirrg
at least a rninirnal irtcreaseof I NCE
for t'uch additional 1'r'ar of LOR, tht' 5-vt ar-old arrivals tested in
fourth gracle'sc'oreclsignificantly belou' thcir preclicted level of
acltievt'rrrent,
at 7 NCEs beklw their preclic'tecl
scoreorr reading, 5
N(lFls bt'low on langrragearts, l0 N(lEs below, rxt social studies,4
N(llis bt'l<lu'ortscicrtc't',
or an
antl5 NCEs below,on rnathematic's,
liverage, rln :rll srrbjt'ct-area tt'sts crlrnbinecl. of 6 N(lFls bekrw,
t'xpecterl levels of pt'rforrnan('e for tlrt'ir l,OR. Iising the sarne
nr('asrlr(',
6-vear-okl arrivals testeclin thc sirth gradtr rverr'5, 10, lJ,
10, and l6 N(lEs below their prt'dictt'd scort's,or an ar,'erage
of l0
N(lFls bckrrv. Sirnilarly,7-year-oldarrivalstesteclirr the si-rthgmde
rvere l, l, -1,4, ancl 7 N(lFls below their pretlicterl scores,or an
avcrag(' of il NCjEs bekrw expectcd levels of pcrforrnanct' for their
I,OR.
'l.hese
5-, 6-, uncl 7-ye'ar-olclarrivals rec'eiveclthe least arrrotrntof
Ll sclroolingirt c'ortparisonwith all other olclerarrivalsin the strrdy.
This rvas the onlv known variablt' that clifferentiated thern from
older LFIP arrivals. One rnight cluestiunwhy the stuclentswho ttlok
the 4tlr-grarle test and who had an age on arrival of 6 or 7 years did
nttt seernto exlteriencethe sarnektw,erlt'vels of achit-vt'rnentof the
6th-gracle test takt-rs whose ag() ol1 arrival was 6 or 7 years.
I Iowever, it is irnportant to rerrnernbr-'rthat the test at each
succererdinggrade level lte,corrrrlscognitive.ly rnore conrplex.
Apparent lags in nrastery of the gopl6rntareasbecorne more visible
in the upper grades. This is especially evident in the data frorn the
llth-sracle test.
632
Tr.tsot-QtrARTr,rRt,l
Age on Arrival: l2- I 5
At first glance, therdata in this study on adolescentarrivals (ages
12-15) appear to contradict Cummins's (1981b) interdependence
hypothesis, which predicts that "older learners who are mort
cognitively rnature and whose Ll proficiency is better developed
would acquirt' cognitively dernanding aspects of L2 proficiency
more rapidly than younger lt-'arners"(p 29). Even rvith a strong
acadermicbackgrouncl in their Ll, studentsin this study rvho arrivecl
in 7th grade at age 12 and were tested 4 yerarslater in llth grade
were strbstantiallybelow national norrns in achievernent in all
srrbjectareasexceltt mathematics.
In this researcher'sopinion, howeveir, these clrarnatic drops in
adolescents scorescannot automatically be attributecl to the critical
period hypothesis (Lt'nnr:berg,1967), r)r, tr) usc O.vama's(1976)
tt:rm, the st'nsitivt'periocl hyltothesis.Instead, the rnajrlr clifferenr.t'
in academic perforrnance m:ry be a rt srrlt of the sc,hools'greater
clernanclson students at the secondarv ltrvel ancl the linritecl lcngth
of tirne LEI'secondary studentshave to reach ,tr,rr,'1"r'els.l'he 8thgrade and llth-gradc vtrrsionsof tht' SIIA differ drarnatically,ancl
t h e s e d i f f e r € ] n c e sa r e s t r o n g l y r e f l e c t e d i n t h e h i g h s c h o o l
curricrrlurtr.In this stucly,l2-year-olclarrivals taking thc 8th-grade
SIIA test wert. scoring around ther 50th NCIE aftcr just 2 years'
schooling in F)nglish,whereas l2-year-old arrivals taking the 11tirgracleSRA test after 5 years'schoolingin English had only reached
the lllst NCFI in reading, 42nclNCE in languagearts, 38th N(lll in
social studies,37th NCtr in science,and 59th NCIFIin nrathernatics.
It nrust be kept in rnind that these LFIP students were not being
proviclecl with any Ll content instruction to help thern continue
cognitive and acadernic subject mastery at grade level while they
were acquiring beginning levels of BICS and CAL['in Flnglish.By
the tinie they had acrluired enough proficiency in English to receive
meaningful instruction in content-area classes, they had in the
meantirnc lost 2-l] yenrs of CIALP devclopnrent antl content
knowledge in rrrathernatics,scienctr.arrtl social stucliesat their aqegracle lt-'vel.l'his put thern significantly behincl in nrastery of the
contplex nraterial recluireclfor high school students.Between their
thircl ancl fourth ye:rrs of schooling all in English, they began to
increasethc-irachievernentleyels,but even projc.ctingthis increased
rate (an average of 6 NCEs per year), it nright require 6-8 years'
LOR for thern to reach national averages of native-speaker
achievernent across all the subject areas. (lummins et al. (1984)
ACli ANr) ItAl'E ()t' ACQr.llstl'toN
6&3
discussthis possibilityin summarizingthe literatureon older versus
youngerarrivals:
The findingsof Cummins[981a] suggestthat the effectsof LOR tend
to diminishafter 5 yearsand thus,in termsof immigrantstudents'ability
to approachgradenormsin L2 academicskills,theremay be a critical
age on arrival at about age 12,after which it will becomeincreasingly
difficult for studentsto catchup. (p. 79)
Another confirmation of the significant amount of Ll transfer of
content knowledge to L2 and the difficulty of losing time in
acadernic development while acquiring L2 was evident in the
scoring pattern among eighth-grade test takers. Twelve-year-old
arrivals with only I-2 years' LOR performed significantly better on
the science,social studies,and mathematicstests than ll-year-old
arrivals with 2-3 years' LOR. The loss of content-area instruction
while 1l-year-old arrivals were acquiring English appeared to lower
their scores,whereas the l2-year-olcl arrivals had the advantage of
an additional year of Ll content instruction to apply to their L2
cclntentknowletlge.
In a reexamination of the data that support Cumrnins's
hypotheses,a number of the studiesfocusingon the developmentof
CALP-related skills that contrast youlger arrivals with older arrivals
define older studentsas 8-12yearsof age (see,for exanrple,Burstall,
1975; Curnmins et al., 1984; Ekstrand, 1976; Ervin-Tripp, 1974;
Grinder, Otorno, & Toyota, 1962;Skutnabb-Kangas& Toukomaa,
1976).This study provides further confirrnation for the hypothersis
that the fastest attainrncnt of the second language for acaderrnic
tr)llrposesoccurs arlrong those whose age on arrival is fJ-ll years,
when these stuclentsare schoolerdonly in the L2 after arrival.
Othcr studies contparing younger arrivals to teenage or aclult
arrivals generally focus on the earlieststagesof languageacquisition
and on Bl(lS-relnted skills (see,for example, Asher & Ciarcia,1969;
Asher & Price, 1967; Ekstrancl, 1978; Olson & Sarnuels, 1973;
Oyanra, 1976, 197U;Patkowski, 1980; Seliger, Krashett,&
Laclerfogecl,
1975; Snow & Iloefnagel-Ilc;hle,1977; Stern, 1967).
Althouqh these studies show initial faster gains in BICIS arnong
tcenagt'ancladult arrivals (as surrrrnarized
by Krashertet al., 1979),
few of these stuclicslook at student qains acrosstinre.
f'rvo stucliesexarnirting CALP gains across tirne (Orrntnrins,
1981a;Snow & Iloefnagle-llc;hle,1978)appear to suplrortfaster L2
clevekrpment among 12- to lS-year-old students, but both studies
used the sarne language rneasur()sacross all ages and exanritted
'fhe
present study, however, focused on tests that
absolute gains.
change with each grade lervcl,with scaleclstandard scores used to
6r}.1
.Y
1 ' E S)(t . Q U A R l ' r ' rr R
compare one age with another. The SRA test reflects appropriate
age-grade cognitive and academic development acrosstime. None
of the studies cited above measured academic qains over time in
language,social studies,science,and mathematicJ,as did this study.
A more detailed analysisof the literature on apleand time variables
in secondlanguageacquisitionis provided in Collier (1987).
This study, therefore, supports a new hypothesis that older
students who arrive at ages 12-15experience the greatest clifficulty
with acquisition of the L2 for acadernicpurposes,cornbined with
continuing content-area development, when these students are
sc'hooledonly in the L2. Such studentsin Grades 7-12 cannot easil),
afford even I or 2 years' loss of cognitive and acadenric developrnent in all subject areas while they are nrastcring English. The
study data suggestthat st:condary-levelstudentsare most in need of
content-:rreaclassestarrght in the Ll, in order for thern to stay at
grade level while they are rnastering English. Another alternative
might be the dt--vekrpmentof ac'c'eleratedcontent-area classcsfor
very advarrced FISL students,covering 2-3 years' acadcnric work in
l - 2 y e a r s . ( l o n t e r t - r r r e l rl ' l s L r ' l a s s e st a r r c ' h ta t s t r r d . n t s 'l t ' v e l . f
English llroficicncy should also be developed for studentsin the
early ycars of ESl,.
Age on Arrival: 8- I I
civen that thc S-year-olcla.rrivalsperformed less rvell than their
peers in 4th gradt', that the 6- ancl 7-),ear-oldarrivals did less well
than their pee'rsin 6th grade, ancl that the l2- to l5-year-olcl arrivals
tested in llth grade achievecl significantly lower tharr the national
average t:ven after 4-5 years of all-English schoclling,then it woulcl
appear that the 8- to 1l-year-old arrivals expericnced the shortest
length of tirne for rcaching the aspectsof CIALP developnrent in the
L2 rneasureclby the SRA tests.
These stuclentshad reacht-d at least the 50th NCE in larrguage
arts, social studies,and rnathernaticsrvithin their first 2 years of allEnglish schooling. In science, the 4th- a.d 6th-qraclc test takers
made it to the 53rd and 54th NCIEs in just 2 years,but it took 4-5
y-earsfor the 8th-grade test takers to reach the 5lst NCE. In reading,
the one test f ocusecl on a pragrnatic rneasure of larrguage
proficiency, all the 4th- and 6th-grade test takers nrade it to the 5lst
N(lE after 3-4 years' LoR, but ihrse taking the 8th-graclereadi.g
test had only reached the 47th NCE after 4-5 years'LOR. Again, it
must bt'remernbered that the testsat each succeedinqlevel becorne
cognitively rnore complex.
A(lr.rANI) rtAt'E ot' AcQtrtsI'I'ION
Although this is a remarkable accomplishment, these advantaged
LEP students with a middle-class background and adequate
education in their Ll have high expectations of competing with
native speakers for university admission and thus need to score
higher than the 50th NCE on tests focused on language.
Achievement attained by native speakersin the school district, at a
mean of 64 NCEs across all subject areas,would require 3-4 more
years of continuing CALP development and subject knowledge in
the L2, projecting the present pattern of 8- to ll-year-old arrivals'
increasesmade each vear.
Reading and LanguageArts
IiSL graduates' better performance on the language arts test in
conrparison with the reading test was indicative of the different
aspectsof language that the two testsrneasured.The language arts
test measured the rnore mechanical, easily taught aspects of
language-granrrlar, spelling, and punctuation. These test items
provided a nleasure of metalinguistic knowleclge about the
language, from a discrete-point, language-testing perspective
(Lado,196I).
Tht: reading test, on the other hancl,irrchrcleda voc:rbulary test of
synonyms and antonynls as well as questions fclllowing reading
'l'he
cornprehension passages.
subject matter of these passages
ranged frclrn topics taken from content areas, to cottsrrtnerskills
such as newspaper erditorialsor advertisernents,to literature. In
contrast to the discrete-point focus of the language arts test, test
iterns on the reading test were much more tr)ragrnatic(Oller, 1979),
mcasuring a wide range of language domains through a reading
passagethat set an age-appropriate context for the cltrestionsthat
followed.
The reading test also assessedthinking skills and was Inor('c'losely
related to the acquisition encl of the acquisitiun-learningccrntinuttnt
(Krashen,1981).On the SRA reaclingtest,the types of items trseclt<r
rreasure vocabulary developrnent and reading cornprehension
required the use clf more comlllex cognitiverprocesses,at thrr llpper
levels of llloonr's taxononry (see Bloorn & Krathwohl, 1977).Such
processesappear to take klrtger to master in L2 CALP clevelclpment
than the mechanics of langrragemeasured in the very lirnitecl SRA
'l'he
language arts test.
content of the SIIA reading test was also
rnure closely related to the c'ontentpresentedin languagesubtestsof
stanclardizecltests for university aclrnissiclnand thrrsrnight serve as
a n)ore appropriate predictor of these LFII' students' f uturer
perforrnance on standardizecllarrguagetests.
636
)t, Q r rARl I,lRLl
1'FtS(
Mathematics
It is encouraging that advantaged LEP students can perform so
well in mathematics, even when portions of the exam inilude math
concepts and problem solving, which rely more heavily on language
skills. Although the remarkably high mathematics achievement was
the exception to other content-area achievement, ESL graduates'
scoresstill followed the same pattern as that found in the other four
content-area tests. The S-year-old arrivals tested in 4th grade and
the 6- and 7-year-old arrivals tested in 6th grade achieved
significantly below their peers who had been in t[e United States
for a shorter time. Likewise, the ESL graduates' llth-grade
achievement in rnathematics was still considerably below ESL
graduates'4th-, 6th-, and 8th-grade achievement in mathematics.
CONCLT]SIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Across all subject areastested and all gr:rde levels combined, LEP
studentsin this study arriving bctween the agesof 8 and ll were the
fastest achievers. seven-year-old arrivals 'nvereslightly below this
pc-.rformance,with an average of 3 NCEs below projected scores
for their LOR. LFIP studentsarriving at ages5 and 6 *e.., projected
to reqrrire at least 2-3 rnort- years'LOR to reach the 8- to ll-year-old
arrivals'perforrtrance level. LEP studentsarriving between the aqes
o I I 2 a r r d l 5 u e r e t l r e l o w t ' s ta t ' h i e v e r sl .r o t h a v i r r qr e u t . h t ' rrlr a t i o n a l
average scores in any subjt'ct area ('x('r'pt nrlrtht.nruticsaftcr 4-5
'l'hey
years' LOR.
were projected to neetl at least another 2-3 yerars
to reach the 50th NCIE on all subiect-areatests.
'l'he
data irnply that 5-, 6-, anci 7-year-old arrivals rnight accluire
Finglishfor acadernicp.rprses u)ore rapidly if they were providerd
a rrrinirnurn of 2 years of continuing c,ognitive acaclemic cleveloprnent in the 1,1.Arrivals at ages 12 to t5 cannot afford to krse tirie
in acaclernicinstruction in the content arcas taught at gracle level.
Thesc subjects might be taught erithtr throtrgh the Ll or throuqh
intensivercolrrses taught irr the L2 rvhen students arc sufficiently
proficient in Finglish to be able to work at gracle lervt:|.It clearly
takes a long tirne to acrluire cAt,P iurd attain appnrpriate levels rif
acadenric achit'vernentin the 1,2in all the subjecia.ti:rs.Deperrding
on a!{€)uf arriva.l, it rnay take these advantagecl t,FlP studenti
anywhere fronr .l-8 years or rnure to reach the 50th N(lFl on
standardizerl tt-.sts
acrossall the subiect areas.It will take thern even
longer to reach nativt' speakers' attainrnent in their rxvn school
district.
It should not be assurneclfrorn this studv that standardizecl.
A C l l ' tA N I ) I t A l ' l , t o F A C O ( ' t S I l ' t o N
637
multiple-choice testsare an adequate measureof CALP. These SRA
tests measure only very limited aspects of the whole range of
language proficiency. For instance, they do not measure listeuing
comprehension, oral production, writing skills, strategic reasoning,
initiative, creativity, or many pragmatic aspects of language.
Moreover, students' anxiety on a timed test can greatly limit their
ability to demonstrate what they know. Standardized tests have
many other limitations as well.
Nevertheless,as long as these testsare used in the mainstream as
a siqnificant measure of acadernic achievement for students ttt
move from one level to the next or to be sclected for special
academic programs, we in ESL and bilingual educ:ttion neerdttt use
such tests to assess rlur students' ability to achievtr in thtr
rnainstrearn.These findinqs show that there is ntt shortctrt to the
developrncnt of cogrtitivt' ac'adertric'secclttdlangtrage proficienc'y
ancl to academic achievement in the second language.It is a process
that takesa long, long tirtte.
Wc plan to continue analyzing this extensive data base fttr
additional findings. Scort-s fronr future years of testing rvill be
ndded, and a tirne-seriesstudy will be undertaken to track each trSL
graduate. New independent variables will be acldecl in ordt'r trr
analyzc differences in educational background, socioctrltural
variables, an<l many other factors tltat rnay influence stttde--nt
achitrvcrne-ntand seconrllangrragcacclrrisitiotr.
T
A(]KNOWI,tsDGMENTS
'l'horrrus
c s s i s t i t r t t ' t ' icn' o n s t r t t t ' t i t t r t
f o r h i s . , ' a h r a b la
I r r o r r l t l l i k t ' t o t h a r r k\ \ ' u y n t ' l ' .
f o r t ' o l l t ' g i u sl u l ) l ) o r t
o f t h t ' c o r n p r r t c rf i l c s a r r r lt l a t a a n a l y s i s F
; l c l aV a l c r o - F i g r r t ' i r a
anrl suggt'stiorrs;antl \lit'lrtcl ()'lvlallt'l for lris helpfrrl c'ottttttt'ntsrttr att t'ltrlit'r
vt'rsion tif this trtic'lc, prt'scrrtt,dat tht' arrnrralrnct'tirrgof tht' Arnt'rit'urrFl<lrrc'atiorral
lit'st'art'hAssociationin \\'ashingtorr,I)(1, in April l9fi7.
T}IE AT]THOR
\/iruinia I). (hllier is AssistarrtI'rolt'ssor of HducutiorrartclAssot'ittc I)irt't'tor of tlrt'
(lcntcr for llilingrral/Nlrrlticulturul/llSl, 'l'cac'ht'r l'rcpunrtiort at ()corgt' N{asorr
languagc
l,nivt'rsity. llcr rcscurch intt'rt'stsart'focrrst'd on aplllit:ationsof st'c'otrcl
. l t t ' i s < ' o - a r r t l r oor f t l r t ' t e a c h t ' r t r a i n i n g
a t ' r l r r i s i t i o nr e s e a r c ht o t h c c l a s s r o o r r rS
textbo<rk Bilhrguul und ESl, Cktssroorts: Truchhrg in lrlulticulturul Oorilt'xts
( M c G r a q .- l t i l l . I 9 t ' t 5 ) .
638
l'tjsoL QtrAIil'ljlil,\
REFERENCES
A s h e r , J . ,& G a r c i a ,G . ( 1 9 6 9 ) . ' l ' h eo p t i r ' a l a g . t . l e a r n a f . r e i g r r r a n g . a g e .
NIctd t:rrt Lan grn ge I ott r na\,,38,3ll4-3,1
l.
A s h t ' r , J . . & I ' ] r i c ' e ,I l . ( 1 9 6 7 ) . ' l ' h t ' l e a m i n g s t r a t t ' g y . f t . t a l p r r - v s i c , a r
- r e s p o r i s:eS o n r ca g c d i f f e r e n c e s .c h i l d D c o c l o p n r t : r r t J, B , l 2 l g 1 2 2 7 .
Blorrrrr,R.s., & Krathu'ohl, D.R. (1977). Tixoru,rtg of t:ducutiottrtl
oltit:t'tiaes:Handb.ok l. cognitixt: dontain. Neu york: L..grrrarr.
llrrrstall, (1. (1975).Prinrarv F-rcrtcltirr thc balan cc. Iirlrtr:aliotrtilRt.,scurclt.
/;. I9:]-19b.
c l < r l l i e r ,\ ' . 1 ' . ( l 9 f J 7 ) . A g c a n d t i n t t ' L , a r i u l t l t : si r t t t c t l t t i s i r i o rot t ' s r , r : o n d
l u n g u u g r 't ' o r a t ' u d e n t i c p u r p o ' e ' ( \ c * ' F . c r r s N . . 2 ) . \ \ ' r r t ' a t . n , N i l ) :
N a t i o r r a l( ) l t ' a r i n g h r l r s tf' r t r I l i l i n g u a l I . l c h r c a t i o n .
c ' l ' u / N t c ' G r a u ' l l i l l . ( 1 1 ) 5 6 )c.u l i f o n t i t t u t ' l t i t , o e n r c tnet , s t s\ ., l o r r t c r t , r(. j.A :
\rrthor.
( l t r t t t r t l i t t sJ,. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . - l ' l r t ' i r r f l u t ' r rocl cl l i l i n g u a l i s r o
nn lpgnitiyt'916u.'t|:,,\
s Y r r t h t ' s i sr l l ' r t ' s t ' i t r c ' lfti n < l i r r g sa r r r l t ' r l l l a n a t r l r y h r ' p o t h t , s t ' s l.l ' p r k l r r g
Puptrs orr Bilinguullsrrr,9, l-.111.
( l t r t n l r t i n sJ, . ( 1 9 7 9 ) .O o g r r i t i v c , / a c u r l t ' r r rl u
i t n' g r r a g t p
, n l l i c i t ' r r r , r 'I,i r r g r r i s t i r ,
i r r t c r t l c l l t ' r t c l c r t c 'tcl r,e o l l t i r n u l a g c r l r r t ' s t i o l ra. n r l s o r r r t '6 t l r t ' r r r r a t t t , r s .
Vrorking Pttytrrson Bilirrglzlisrn, 19, lg7-205.
( l r r r r r r r i r r s ,l . ( 1 9 , 9 0 )'.l ' h t ' t ' n t r t a r r < lt ' x i t f a l l a c y i n l r i l i n g r r a l
t,thrr.lrtiorr.
N A l l F . J o t t n t t t l .J ( i ] ) . 3 . . ri t t .
( l t t t t t t t t i l t s , . .l ( l 9 , 9 l a ) . A g c t l r t a r r i v a l u r r r l i r n r r r i g r u r r t
s t ' c . 6 r r tlla r r g r r u g t '
I t ' r r r r r i r rign ( l a r r a < l l rA: r t ' u s s e s s r r t ' nAt .p p l i t , t l L h t g t r i s l i c l g
; ,. l l ] 2 - l . l g .
( lrrrrrrrrirrs, ( l98l b). 'l'lrt' rolt' of prirrrary l:rngrragt,
J.
t l t , r . r , l o p r r r t , nrrr r
l ( ' ( ' ( ' s sl o r l t r n g r u r g t ' l r r i r r o r i t sr t r r i l t , r r t sI .r r
l l r o r t t o t i t t gt ' t l r r c ' a t i t l l i lst u
S c h o o l h t g t t t r t l u t r g t t a g t , n r i r r o r i.l st ll u t l c t r l .tt\: l l t t , t t r t . t i r . t t l
I t . t n n ( t L . o r k( p p .
i ) - ' 1 9 ) .t , < l s A r r g t ' l t ' s :( l i r l i f o r n i l S t a t c t r r r i v t ' r s i t r ' .N i r t i o n l l F l r . l l r r i r t i i r i r .
l ) i s s c t r r i n a t i o rarn r l A s s t ' s s r n t ' r(rlte r r t c r .
( l r r r r r r r r i r r s , ( 1 9 , s -.1 )B i l . h t g u u l i s r tut r t d s p e t : i t t l
J.
c r l t t c a l i o t t :l s s r r r , .isr r
as,!r',!srlrr'nl
rtntl pctlugogrT.Ok'vt'tl<ln,Iinglarrcl:lllrrltilirrurrul\,lsttt,rs.
( l r r n r n i r r s , & S n ' a i r r\,{ . ( l g S l l ) .A r r u l y s i s , l -r rl l r t , t o r i t . :
J..
l l c u t l i r r gt h c t c x t o r
tltt'rea<lt'r's o*'rr pr.jt'c'tiorrsl ,{ rcplv to Iirlt,lskr ct ul. A1,,1r1lrr1
Littstr istics.,1.2:J-11
( l r r r r r r n i r r Js ., . S * ' a i r r ,\ 1 . , N a k a j i r r r u K
. . . I l a n t l s c ' . r n l l t 'J. . . ( i r t ' r , r r .I ) . , &
'l'ran' (l
( 1 9 8 1 ) . [ , i n g t r i s t i t ' i r r t c r t k ' p t ' n r l ( ' n c ,r(r' r n o n g J l p i r r r c s t ' a l r l
\ i i t ' t t t a t t t t ' s ci l r r r t r i g r a r t st t r r c l t ' n t sl.r r ( 1 . I l i v e r a ( l i c l . ) , ( l l , t r t t r t t t l t c t t t r t r c
coil_tp(l(nc('u\tltrouchcs lo ltmgrutgc pntf icit,rx'tl osl(ssnt(,nl:Iltscort.lt
, i n g l a r r <Il\:l r r l t i l i r r g r r r\rl 1
u t r t p l i c u l i o n( p y r . 6 0 - l t l ) .( l l t ' r . c c l o n F
l ttt'rs.
__u!,,1
l ) r r l a y . I I . , & B t r r t , N l . ( l 9 7 l J ) . I i n r t t r t ' s t ' a r c ' ht o r n c t l r o c li r r b i l i n g r r a l
c < l r r c ' a t i r rInr .r J . t i . A l a t i s ( l i r l . ) . ( ) t , o r g t , l o w t tL rn i o t : r s i t 1 R
1 t n u t t l7 . t t l t l ts, r r
I ' u t r g t t u g t ' su n t l I ' i n g u i . s t i c sI g T S ( p p . 5 5 r - 5 7 5 ) . i V a s h i r r g t o n , l ) ( ) :
O r ' < ' r g t ' t o w nL l n i v c r s i t vl ) r c s s .
F l d t ' l s k l ' ,( - 1 . I, l r r t l t ' l s . n , S . , F k r r t ' s ,I l . , B a r k i n , I . - . ,A l t w , c r g t ' r ,l ] . , & j i l b e r t ,
K ( 1 9 8 3 ) .S t ' r n i l i n g u a l i s narn c ll a n g r r a g tt'k ' f i c i t . A p p l i c t l L i r t g t t i s t i r : s , ,l1- ,
22.
A ( ; E A N I ) R A l ' t , to F ' A C ( ) t : t S t l ' t o N
639
Ekstrand, L. (1976).Age and length of residenceas variablesrelated to the
adjustment of migrant children, with special reference ttl second
language learning. In G. Nickel (Ed.), Proceedings of the F'ourth
lnternational Congress of Applied I'inguistics (Vol. 3, pp. 179-197)'
Stuttgart: Hochschulverlag.
Ekstrand, L. (1978).English without a book revisiterd:Tlie effect of age on
second language actluisition in a forrnal setting. Didakometry, No. 60.
Malrncj, Sweden: School of Education, Departnrent of Educational ancl
I'sychological Rescarch.
Err.in-Tripp, S.M. (1974). Is seconcl languagc learning like the first?
TESOL Quarterlu, B, I I l-127.
G r i n d e r , R . , O t o r n o , A . , & 1 ' o y o t i i , W . ( 1 9 6 2 ) . ( . ' o m p a r i s o n sb e t w e e n
secgnd, third, ancl forrrth gradc chilclren in the audio-lingual lcurning,rI
Jalranesrras a sccurt(l langtrage.lourruil, of Educatittnol Reseurch, 56,
463-469.
Krasherr,S.D. (19fll). Second languuge acquisitittrtarul second lortgttugt:
ktoning. Oxfortl: Itcrgamon I'ress.
Krashcn, S.D. (i9u2). Acc'ounting for chilcl-adult differenc'es in second
languagc ratc attcl attainrnent. In S.l). Krasht'n, R.(,-.Scarct'lla,& M.A.
Long (Eds.), Chikl-adult dif f erenccsin seconrllunguageacquisitiorr\p1l.
202-226).Rowley, MA: Nervbtrry Ilotrst'.
K r a s h c n ,S . [ ) . , L o n g , M . A . , & S c a r c t ' l l a ,R . ( ] . ( 1 9 7 9 ) . A g e , n t t t ' , r n c l
eventrralattainnrent itt secotrtl language ac'tlttisition.TESOI' ()uurtcrlq,
t3. 573-5u2.
K r a s h e r t .S . [ ) . . S c a r c t ' l l a ,R . ( ] . . & l , o r r g . N I . A . ( l ! d s . ) . ( 1 9 8 2 ) .C h i l d - a d u l t
rliffcrencts in u:t:ond lunguugt' at'tlttisitiLttt.llou'lt'y', \lA: Nt'u'bur)'
I I ousr'.
, lretn.
l , a c l o ,R . ( t 9 6 1 ) . L a n g u u g e t c s t i n g .L o n c l t l n :L o t t g t l t a r t sC
Nt'r'r' York:
(1967).
of
lunguagt.
oundations
Biological
Lt'nnclrerg, t'l.ll.
f
\\'iley.
lVIc'Laughlin,ll. ( l9fJ,1).Stcond-lurtguage acquisition irt chiklhood: V ol. I.
Preschoctlchiklrcn (2nd ecl.). Ilillsclale, NJ: Lar.vrcnce[irlbarrnr.
O f l e r , J . \ \ ' . , J r . ( 1 9 7 9 ) .L u n g u o g t :t t : s t sa t s c h o c t l L. o n c l o r t :L o n g t n a n .
'l-ht'
rclationshilr bt'tll't'etr agt' ancl
Olson, L., & Sarnrrels,S.J. (1973).
prtlrttntciati<nt.
ac('rrracy ol fort'ign langrragc
lounrul of Educatitnuil
.
Rt,vearch.66. 26:J-267
0 y a n r a , S . ( 1 9 7 6 ) .A s t ' n s i t i v r ' I t e ' r i o cf l< l r t h c a c r l u i s i t i o no f a n o t t r t a t i v t '
ounrul o f Psgcholirtstttistit ,1"t r'srch, 5, 26l-285.
lrlrrrrtological systertt.
'l'heJ
sensitivc peri<lcliurcl conrlrrcht'ttsiortof spct'c'h.
O1,arrra,S. (197u).
Workhg, Papers on Rilinguulism, 16, l-17.
P a t k o w s k i , M . S . ( l 9 t j 0 ) . ' l ' h e s e n s i t i v cp e r i o r l f o r t h e ra c q u i s i t i o no f s y r t t a x
in a sec'oncllanguage.l,anguagc I'curning,30,449-172.
and ucudtnic achierlt:Iiirt'ra, (1. (l.ld.). (198,1).I'unguagt Ttroficicrrt:t1
Englancl:N{ultilingtralMattcrs.
rnarf. (lle'u'trclon,
S c i c n c e R e s e a r c h A s s o t ' i a t c s .( 1 9 7 [ J. ) S c i c n c c R e s e u r c h A s s o c i u t t : s
a c h i r : u c n r c r rst e r i t s .( l h i c a g o : A r r t h o r .
t ' E S () t , Q t : A l t 1 ' t . l R t , \
seliger, II., Krashen,s., & Ladefoged, P. (1975). Maturational constraints
_- in the acquisition of second languages.Language Sciences,J8,20-22.
skutna-bb-Kangas,T., & Toukomaa, P. (rg7G).Teiachingmigrantchildren's
mother tongue and learning the language of the h,ost countrg in the
context of the socio-culhral situation of the migrant family. tlelsinki:
The Finnish National (,-ornrnissionfor LINESCO.
S n o r v , c l . , & F l o e f n a g e l - I I c t h l e ,N { . ( 1 9 7 7 ) . A g e c l i f f e r e ' c e s i n t h e
lrronunciation of foreign sounds.Languoge ancl Speech,20,357-365.
snorv, (1., & Il.ef.agel-H6hlt:, M. (1978).The critic'alperiod for language
acquisition: Evidencc frorn sercondlanguage learning. Child Dei,elopn t t ' n l , 4 9 , | | l , { -I I 2 l J .
sterri, ll.ll. (I'ld.). (1967). Forcigrt langtnges in primanl educatbn: The
te.uchingot' f oreign or secontl languagt,sto tloitnger ,,lhilrlr"rr.Lonclon:
Oxforcl I iniversitv Prcss.
'l'allrtacfge,
G . K . ( 1 . 9 7 6 )l.n t e r T t r e t i n gl / c E s . M o u n t a i n V i c w , C A : R M C
RescarchCrlrlloraticln.
de Villiers. I'.A., & de Villiers, J.G. (lg7g). Earltl ktngttage. (,'anrbriclge,
l\,lA: I Iarvard tjrrivcrsitr. l,rt'ss.
A G U A N I ) l t A t ' t . lo t ' A C ( ) t r t s t ' t ' l o N
6,1t