Use of L1 In Teaching L2

The debate over whether English Language classrooms should include or exclude students' native language has been a contentious issue for a long time (Brown, 2000, p195),but the research findings have not been completely enticing in any case yet.The aim of this paper is to identify whether the use of L1 in English Language classes hinders or facilitaties in language acqusition.The study will be conducted at Pamukpınar High School,Selçuk Anatolian High School and Sivas High School with the participation of 230 students.Data will be collected through a questionnaire and interview.In interview part, twenty students will be selected randomly for participation in the interviews get a more detailed information about what they think about the use of L1 in their English classrooms.Firstly,the advantages and disadvantages of the use of L1 in English Language classes will be examined by considering the other studies.Afterwards,determined class will be applied a questionnaire and interviews.We expect that the analysis of the quantitative data will reveal that the use of L1 in English Language classes will have weighted advantages. Key Terms : Using L1 in English Language classes,advantages and disadvantages of using L1,language acqusition

University of Leicester
MA Applied Linguistics and TESOL
Dissertation

The use of the first language in the Dutch EFL classroom:
An analysis of teachers’ beliefs and practices

Jeanine Mysliwiec

Abstract
Language acquisition theories have long emphasised the importance of the use of the target language and the negative effects of using the first language. Nonetheless first language use is a common occurrence, particularly in the foreign language classroom where various challenges have to be faced when using the target language. A number of scholars and researchers now question the exclusion of the L1, particularly when teachers and pupils share the same language and many now advocate a principled use.
This study examines teachers attitudes and beliefs on the role of L1 in their teaching in the Netherlands. Thirty seven teachers of English at Dutch secondary schools completed a questionnaire exploring their beliefs about the use of the first language, the results of which were compared to the classroom practices of five non-native speaker secondary school teachers. Two teachers were subsequently interviewed to gain insight into factors influencing their classroom practices. The findings show that teachers beliefs and attitudes on the first language are not always reflected in their language classroom.  In addition an inconsistency in use of the first language indicated its use is not always principle based. Furthermore, several factors influenced language choices, such as learners’ ability, pupils’ attitudes and the realities of the classroom in general. Future recommendations would be that teachers are made aware of their own language use and are guided in developing a judicious and principled employment of the first language in order to maximise the use of the target language.

Language is an ever-developing and ever-changing phenomenon. Therefore, how it is dealt with in teaching/learning settings also develop and change. Translanguaging is a relatively new example of such efforts, challenging the L2-dominant language classrooms and the idealized status of native speaker teachers. It suggests both L1 and L2 can be used in harmony in class, which would yield positive results in terms of language acquisition. What is more, second language learners do not aim to achieve native-like proficiency any more. They would rather communicate by accessing whatever is available in their communicative repertoire, which also justifies the use of Translanguaging. In the light of the facts mentioned above, this study aims to provide insights into theoretical underpinnings and classroom implications of Translanguaging, which has been receiving increasingly more attention in recent years.

In the controversial area of teachers` use of students` native language in the EFL class, one area has received little attention. Little is known about preferences for teachers`L1 use over time. The researcher aims to explore student and teachers`perceptions of teachers` use of the L1 in the EFL classroom, focusing on change over time. To explore this gap, the researcher asked three research questions: 1) Are students` preliminary preferences for their teachers` Japanese use affected by students` previous language-learning experiences, and if so, how? 2) Are teachers ìnitial preferences for their use of Japanese affected by their training and experiences prior to course initiation, and if so, how? And, 3) Do students and teachers` preferences change over two semesters? The researcher followed Japanese students (N = about 500) over two terms in 14 tertiary settings in Japan to ascertain changes in their preferences towards the use of their L1 in English class. Additionally, the researcher followed English teachers, both Japanese and non-Japanese (N = about 35), to examine whether their preferences for the use of their students`L1 also change over time. Questionnaires were administered to students and teachers at the beginning, midpoint, and end of their courses. The first questionnaire assessed background, proficiency and preferences, while the second and third questionnaires focused on preferences. At the end, a few students and teachers were interviewed regarding their preference details. Analyses, which the author has conducted over previous studies, have disclosed that students and teachers have different perceptions regarding the employment of students`L1 in class. Students preferred it in emotional learning situations, while teachers preferred it for classroom management. The author hypothesizes that L1 preference tendencies will be replicated and clarified, and in addition, will ascertain changes over time. The researcher will present detailed findings and explore theoretical and pedagogical implications.

SLA is a complex phenomenon in which multiple factors are at play. Besides the much researched cognitive factors that play a role in SLA, there are individual elements, more psychological in nature, that also influence L2 acquisition. These individual factors are many and various. This paper will analyze how individual differences, particularly those related to the psychological and affective domain, affect and interact with each other in SLA and will discuss the classroom implications related to them in order to both, shed light on the learning process and enhance teachers’ teaching practice.

In EFL contexts where students' chances to use English are limited to the classroom, minimizing their use of L1 to develop fluency in English is often encouraged in instruction. However, recent studies have reported that students' partial use of L1 in code-switching or translanguaging offers various pedagogical advantages. This research examines advanced Japanese high school students' use of and perceptions toward L1 (Japanese) in translanguaging during communicative L2 (English) activities. Drawing on both quantitative data from a survey answered by 190 third-year high school students and qualitative data from classroom observations and in-depth interviews with nine students from the same group, the study attempted to reveal context-sensitive findings about students' use of L1 in translanguaging in the EFL classroom. The quantitative survey results revealed that all the students, to varying degrees, partially used L1 during communicative L2 activities. Data from classroom observations supported the survey results and identified five salient speech functions of students' partial L1 use in the activities. In addition, the interview data showed students' nuanced reasons for and perceptions toward their partial L1 use during such activities, highlighting a unique communication layer for translanguaging. Based on the discussion of the findings, recommendations for pursuing contextualized communicative language teaching and translanguaging pedagogy in EFL classrooms are provided at the end of the paper.

In the field of foreign language (FL) vocabulary acquisition, there seems to be a growing awareness of the fact that the mother tongue (L1) might have a facilitating role for language learners. Research has found evidence to support the positive effects of using the L1 as an instructional tool, particularly at the initial stages of FL learning. The present study explores the role that the L1 plays in young learners' retention of and access to English vocabulary. An experimental group and the corresponding control group of 10-11 year-old children in an EFL Catalan school context were recruited for the study. The experimental group was exposed to both the English input and the L1 translation of the target items, whereas the control group received just the English input. Differences between the groups in terms of lexical retention and lexical access were analysed. Results of the present study suggest that providing students with the L1 equivalents of the

This qualitative study explored English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers' perspectives on first language (L1) use in the second language (L2) classroom. The study focused on Jordanian public secondary school EFL teachers and drew on Macaro's (2001) three codeswitching positions-optimal (i.e., L1 use can enhance L2 learning), maximal (i.e., L1 use should be minimized in L2 learning), and virtual (i.e., L1 should never be used in L2 learning). Data were collected through a classroom observation and two rounds of interviews, one pre-and one post-observation. The findings suggested that teachers' views on L1 use varied depending on two main factors: 1) students' L2 proficiency, and 2) type of lesson. In terms of Macaro's (2001) framework, teachers held an optimal view toward L1 use with low-proficiency students, yet a maximal view with higher-proficiency students. Similarly, teachers held an optimal position toward L1 use in grammar classes, yet a maximal position in reading classes and a virtual position in listening and speaking classes. The findings of this study are unlike Macaro's (2001) results, which found that teachers hold a static position toward L1 use regardless of the proficiency of learners or lesson type. Finally, the present study found that teachers were aware of L1 overuse ramifications. The findings of this research may help L2 scholars, policy makers, and teacher-practitioners to understand the role of the L1 in the L2 classroom, particularly in the context of Jordan and similar EFL contexts.

Codeswitching is reported to be a common feature of group work in EFL classes, particularly those with learners sharing the same native language. On the other hand, there is little research on codeswitching in group work in EFL contexts. This study aims to investigate the reasons why codeswitching is employed in EFL group work interactions among learners who share the same native language. The data were collected via observations of group work processes and open-ended questionnaires given to the students and thematically analysed. According to the findings, codeswitching in group work served mainly four types of purposes: i) search for equivalence, ii) meaning clarification, iii) following task procedure and iv) emotional expression. The task type being a spontaneous speaking task or an outcome production task and the students' being in an on-record or off-record mode also affected the extent of codeswitching. Another finding was that the instructor's use of L1 in the classroom might derive students to switch codes. The students reported that they switched from English to their native language particularly due to their lack of proficiency and the fact that they found L1 communication a convenient way of expressing their concerns and emotions. Codeswitching was found to be a builder of solidarity and a means of achieving task targets as well as interactional fluency, implying that it can serve pedagogically useful purposes in group work in EFL classes.
Keywords: codeswitching; codeswitching in group work; codeswitching in EFL classes; group work; reasons for codeswitching

For a long time, the main parameter to determine whether students have reached their L2 attainment has been their conversational proficiency. Consequently, everyone's attention has always fallen on conversational skills (speaking and listening). When we talk about second language writing, we can notice that most of the students finish their L2 studies with certain weaknesses in writing. Why is that?  Is there a solution? We could say that in general, there is a belief regarding L2 writing. For example, in our country, if it is not at the university within language careers, we cannot find subjects dedicated to teaching composition. Indeed, most of the people learn "English for communicating," and that we mostly do it by speaking. Especially tourist areas, English is commonly used is to speak, leaving behind the writing or even reading skill.

The use of a learner’s first language (L1) in the second language (L2) learning process has long been a highly-debated area in the field of ESL, with negative views prevalent in the majority of modern L2 teaching methods. Recent research into the field has shown that a learner’s L1 is in fact a tool at their disposal that can aid and facilitate L2 learning. However, advocates of monolingual teaching strategies and exclusive use of the target language to develop L2 proficiency remain skeptical of L1 use in the L2 classroom, and thus rarely utilize it as an effective teaching tool. This study investigates the views of pre-service, trainee ESL teachers regarding the use of the L1 in L2 learning. The results show that, although some participants were accepting of L1 use in the L2 classroom, their perspectives were generally limited to the functions of translation and explanation, exhibiting a relative lack of knowledge regarding the L1’s other facilitating functions in L2 learning and teaching. More education into L1 use is therefore suggested for ESL teacher training courses, to prepare future ESL teachers to make their own informed decisions on effective L1 use in their classrooms.

Many teaching approaches originating in communicative and immersive paradigms and recognized as mainstream trends in second/foreign language acquisition (SLA) have challenged the usage of the first language (L1) (Hall and Cook, 2013: 8). L1 includes students’ mother tongue and other languages students (and teachers) may speak with varying levels of proficiency. For instance, Natural Language Learning (Krashen, 1981), Content-based (Met, 1991; Lightbown, 2014), Project- and Task-based Learning (Beckett and Miller, 2006; Hedge, 1993; Ellis, 2003; Leaver and Willis, 2004), and the neurolinguistic approach (Germain, 2017) tacitly or explicitly ban learning activities based on translation, contrastive grammar/phonetics, and explicit instruction in L1, among others, from the second/foreign-language (L2) classroom. The use of L1 is accepted as a last resort (Littlewood and Yu, 2011: 64) or is restricted to specific areas, such as explicit grammar instruction (particularly with beginners), conveying and checking the meaning of words, and classroom management (von Lier, 1995: 40; Cook, 2001: 410-211; Notion, 2003; Kerr, 2016; Deller and Rinvolucri, 2002).2 Despite the near-consensus about ‘monolingual imperatives’ (Hall and Cook, 2013: 177), many L2 instructors make extensive use of L1 (Littlewood and Yu, 2011; Kerr, 2016: 517; Marsella, 2020: 22) and the interest in L1 use has been steadily increasing in SLA literature throughout the past decades. However, the issue of L1 use has been never systematically addressed in connection with authenticity, another ‘hot topic’ in SLA (Will, 2018: 10). Studying a corpus of more than 80 publications in English from the late 1990s – 2020, we were able to find just a few noteworthy instances of authentic/authenticity being used in discussions on L1 use, which can be divided in the following three groups. The first type of co-occurrences relates the authenticity and acknowledgment of cognitive mechanism of L2 acquisition which inherently involves L1. It can be traced back to Lindsay Clanfield’s and Duncan Foord’s publication in a free online journal in 2000. In a short note presenting their ‘practical ideas kit’, the teacher trainers from Oxford House College in Barcelona encourage teachers to use L1: ‘If you can do this, your classroom is likely to be more authentic in the sense that it reflects the natural interplay of L1 and L2 which is inherent in second language acquisition.’ (Clanfield and Foord, 2000). A similar argument can be found in Cook (2001: 402), Ostovar-Namaghi and Norouzi (2015: 617), Thurbull and Arnett (2002: 207), Butzkamm (2003) and Butzkamm and Caldwell (2009). The second type co-occurrence is represented by Leo van Lier (2011) who considers ‘translanguaging’ to be an important factor in ‘authenticating learning’ (van Lier, 2011: 14). Finally, Claire Kramsch (2012: 116) questions the established category of ‘authenticity’, along with ‘native/non-native speaker’, as being incompatible with ‘multilingual SLA’. These co-occurrences, while not significant in volume terms, demonstrate that the issue of L1 in L2 classrooms is deeply connected to inquiries about authenticity. On the other hand, recent research on authenticity in SLA comes very close to the issue of L1 use when it reveals a deep connection between so-called ‘native-speakerism’ (Holliday 2006: 385; Pinner, 2016: 44) and the dominant representation of authenticity (Lowe and Pinner, 2016), and suggests an innovative understanding of authenticity that covers not only traditional native-speaker-oriented textual authenticity, but also what Will (2018: chap. 3) encodes as the authenticity of individual behaviour. In this chapter, we try to situate instances we have found where the concept authenticity is applied to L1 use in the context of current trends in SLA. We argue that consolidating the conceptual nexus around two core notions of SLA – L1 and authenticity – as parts of the larger conceptual framework of an emerging students/teachers-as-people paradigm would help to reinforce theoretical arguments in favor of systematic use of L1 in the L2 classroom. The proposed approach also enables us to bring together data from two fields in SLA – poststructuralist and neurocognitive – and to put forward an inclusive socio-cognitive model of L1 use, which could be a foundation for a L1-as-pedagogy approach. In addition, a cross-analysis of these two core concepts can reveal some emerging tendencies in the understanding of authenticity in SLA.