L2 LEARNERS’ MOTHER TONGUE, LANGUAGE DIVERSITY

AND LANGUAGE ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

Leticia N. Aquino, Ph. D.
Philippine Normal University
Alicia, Isabela, Philippines

Introduction

From the moment a child is born, he begins to learn about the world and his
language. He begins to acquire mother tongue (MT) at home and develops most of the
understanding of this first language in the early part of his developmental life. Basically, he
learns the basics of the first language from the family. Children growing up in bilingual
homes can have more than one mother tongue or native language. This occurs when the
child’s parents speak different languages. Thus, he becomes bilingual. However, even in the
case of bilingualism, one language usually dominates over the other.

Through the mother tongue he acquired at home, the child eventually identifies
himself belonging to a family, communicates himself and develops his personality as a
unique individual capable of performing developmental tasks at home. This was supported by
Gollnick & Chinn (2006) in their definition of language as a means of communication that
shapes cultural and personal identity and socializes one into a cultural group. The child’s
interaction with family members and the environment helps build his language proficiency
and competence.

Cummins (1998, 2006) explains that the development of competence in the mother
tongue or first language (L1) serves as a foundation of proficiency that can be transported to
learning another language or second language (L2). This competence in L1 is significant in
the process of second language acquisition (SLA). Learning another language is part of
language acquisition. It is the same process man use in acquiring the first and second
language. It requires meaningful interaction and natural communication in the target language
in which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages
they are conveying. Error correction and explicit teaching of rules are not relevant to
language acquisition (Brown 2001) but native speakers can modify their utterances addressed
to acquirers to help them understand, and these modifications are thought to help the
acquisition process (Ferguson, 2011).

Language acquisition leads to acculturation (Schumann, 1975, 1978) and

multiculturalism. Through this, man widens his socio-cultural and linguistic experiences and
gains better insight into human relationship and appreciation of human struggle and
achievement. In showing great interest to acquire competence in many languages, man builds
association, relationship and awareness of the world.

The world we live in now is a mix culture. Cultural diversity leads to language
diversity. Multiculturalism, diversity and inclusion will prove to be important assets to both

1
public education systems as well as corporate organizations given the rise of cultural
exchange and interconnectedness between different societies around the world. Teaching
children about the values of inclusion while experiencing a multicultural classroom
(Crawford, 1993) can help to decrease the power and influence of stereotypes while
promoting openness, acceptance and friendship with individuals who have a different cultural
background.

In the Philippine setting, linguistic diversity is apparent. The number of students

speaking second languages other than the mother tongue is rapidly increasing. In fact, the
thirteen (13) indigenous languages spoken in the Philippines are manifestation of the
country’s true picture of the diversity of the human race. They are as follows: Tagalog,
Cebuano, Ilokano, Hiligaynon, WarayWaray, Kapampangan, Bilkol, Albay Bikol,
Pangasinan, Maranao, Maguindanao, Kinaray-a, and Tausug. One or more of these is spoken
natively by more than 90% of the population. The various groups as in the Philippines bear
testimony to the old and continuous process of migration.
(http://www.buzzle.com)

In the province of Isabela which is the demographical location of the present research
conducted and the home of the researcher, the languages spoken are Iloco or Ilocano
(68.71%), Ybanag (14.05%), Yogad, Gaddang and Paranan (7.22%) and Tagalong (10.02%).
The Tagalog group which comprised of 10.02% was a product of migration. (Fly Philippines.
Retrieved 18 June 2011: A Brief History of Isabela). There is no doubt in this scenario that
classrooms today contain diverse students with different cultural understanding and
language backgrounds coming from the different towns of the Province of Isabela.

The exploration on language diversity of the students move on to the idea of whether
it bears connection on their learning in general.

Recent research finding reveal that bilinguals who are highly proficient in two or
more languages are reported to have enhanced executive function and are better at some
aspects of language learning compared to monolinguals. Research indicates that a
multilingual brain is nimbler, quicker, and better able to deal with ambiguities, resolve
conflicts, and resist Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia longer.
(http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/reading/li7refer.htm)

On the other hand, there are researches such as that of Mwinsheikke (2003) claiming
that language plays a role but not a major and dominant role in academic success of the
learners. Furthermore, on tests of vocabulary, bilinguals frequently seem to perform at lower
levels than monolinguals (Ben Zeev, 1977b; Doyle, Champagne, & Segalowitz, 1978 cited by
Allman 2005). The reason for this seems to be that bilingual children have to learn two
different labels for everything, which reduces the frequency of a particular word in either
language (Ben Zeev, 1977b). This makes the task of acquiring, sorting, and differentiating
vocabulary and meaning in two languages much more difficult when compared to the
monolingual child’s task in one language (Doyle et al., 1978).

In the light of these discussions on mother tongue, bilingualism, multilingualism and

language diversity, the researcher would like to investigate if there is interplay of these
variables on the language academic achievement of the second language learners specifically
on their language skills courses. Hence, this study.

2
Related Literature and Studies

On Mother Tongue and Second Language Learning

Mother tongue (MT) is a a language acquired during childhood, so called First
language (L1). It is acquired without formal education.

Research strongly supports the idea thtat the first language use is advantageous in
English language acquisition (August & Hakuta, 1997; Cuevas, 1997). In almost all instances
of learning, first language is used to clarify and extend student’s understanding. Students
facilitate learning of the L2 by using the same strategies that work so well in acquiring the
first language. They already have and understanding of the meaning, use and purpose of the
target language. (Lindfors, 1987).

Both cognitive development and academic development in the first language have
been found to have positive effects on second-language learning (Bialystock, 1991; Collier,
1989, 1992; Garcia, 1994; Genessee, 1987, 1994; Thomas & Collier, 1997). Academic skills,
literacy development, concept of formation, subject knowledge, and strategy development
learned in the first language are applied and transferred to the second language learning.
However, because literacy is socially situated, it is equally critical to provide a supportive
school environment that allows the academic and cognitive development in the first language
to flourish.

On English as a Second Language

The learning of English as a second language and as part of the language acquisition
process of most Filipinos has put them in advantage. Truly, English has emerged as the global
language that is widely used in information technology, international trade and industry,
aerial and maritime communications, sciences, global sports, innovations, discoveries and
competitiveness.

Increasing globalization has created a large need for people in the workforce who can
communicate in multiple languages. The uses of common languages are in area such as trade,
tourism, international relations, technology, media, and science. Many countries such as
Korea (Kim Yeong-seo, 2009), Japan (Kubota, 1998) and China (Kirkpatrick & Zhichang,
2002) frame education policies to teach at least one foreign language at the primary and
secondary school levels. However, some countries such as India, Singapore, Malaysia,
Pakistan, and the Philippines use a second official language in their governments., According
to GAO (2010), China has recently been putting enormous importance on foreign language
learning, especially the English Language (en.Wikipedia.Org).

On Language Acquisition Acculturation

Second Language Acquisition (SLA) is the process of acquiring or learning a new
language in addition to a person’s first language. It is also called second- language learning or
L2 acquisition. It also refers to the scientific discipline devoted to studying that process. It
can also incorporate the learning of third, fourth, or subsequent languages.

Language acquisition has been studied from the perspective of developmental

psychology and neuroscience, which looks at learning to use and understand language
parallel to a child’s brain development. It has been determined, through empirical research on

3
developmentally normal children, as well as though some extreme cases of language
deprivation, that there is a “sensitive period” of language acquisition in which human infants
have the ability to learn any language. Several finding have observed that from birth until the
age of six months, infants can discriminate the phonetic contrasts of all languages.
Researchers believe that this gives infants the ability to acquire the language spoken around
them. After this age the child is only able to perceive the phonemes specific to the language
he or she is learning. http://joanofarcacademy.com/importance-of-bilingualism/

Schumann (1978) formulated a model of L2 learning based on the social psychology

of acculturation. He defined acculturation as the social and psychological integration of the
learner with the target language group. He explained two types of acculturation:

1. In which the learner is psychologically open and socially integrated with the
target language group, and as a result, develops sufficient social contacts to
enable him to acquire the target language; and
2. In which the learner regards the target language speakers as a reference
group whose lifestyle and values she consciously and unconsciously desires
to adopt and identify with psychologically.

He explained further that social variables involved in acculturation and L2 learning,

which encompass the social relationship between two different linguistic groups. One group
is considered the L2 learning group and the other the target language group. He discussed
seven (7) social factors that can either promote or inhibit contact between these two groups,
and thus affect the degree of acculturation and L2 learning. 1) social dominance patterns; 2)
integration strategies; 3) enclosure; 4) cohesiveness and size of the L2 group; 5) congruence
or similarity between the target language and the L2 groups; 6) attitudes; and 7) intended
length of residence in the target area.

On Bilingualism, Multilingualism and Language Diversity

Evidently, bilingualism provides the ability to converse with more people. However,
studies show it also makes you smarter. In recent years, scientists have seen its profound
effect on once brain, improving cognitive skills and protecting against dementia in old age.

The following excerpt from the New York Times article “Why Bilinguals Are
Smarter,” explains how the bilingual brain functions:

“The collective evidence from a number of such studies suggests that the
bilingual experience improves the brain’s so-called executive function - a command
system that directs the attention processes that we use for planning, solving problems
and performing various other mentally demanding tasks. These processes include
ignoring distractions to stay focuses, switching attention willfully from one thing to
another and holding information in min - like remembering a sequence of directions
while driving”

The following excerpt from the New York Times article “Why Bilinguals Are
Smarter,” explains how bilingualism contributes to long-term health:

4
 “Bilingualism’s effects also extend into the twilight years. In a recent study
of 44 elderly Spanish-English bilinguals, scientists led by the neuropsychologist
Tamar Gollan of the University of California, San Diego, found that individuals with
a higher degree of bilingualism – measured through a comparative evaluation of
proficiency In each language - were more resistant than others to the onset of
dementia and other symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease: the higher the degree of
bilingualism, the later the age of onset.”
(http://koanofarcacademy.com/importance-of-bilingualism/).

Marsh (2009) on his research, “The contribution of Multilingualism to Creativity”

gave particular attention on the brain. He says that neurosciences offer an increasing amount
of strong evidence of versatile knowledge of languages being beneficial for the usage of an
individual’s brain. The research report brings forth six main areas where multilingualism and
mastery of complex processes of thought seem to put people in advantage. These include
learning in general, complex thinking and creativity, mental flexibility, interpersonal and
communication skills, and even a possible delay in the onset of age-related mental
diminishment later in life. One of the central cerebral areas highlighted in the research report
is the one responsible for memory function. People rely especially on the short-term memory
when thinking, learning, and making decisions. March further explains that the enhanced
memory can have a profound impact on cognitive function. This may be one reason why the
multilingual shows superior performance in handling complex and demanding problem-
solving tasks when compared to monolinguals. They seem to be able to have an advantage in
handling certain thinking processes.

On Language Academic Achievement

Most research on the relationship between L1 and L2 learning makes reference to the
two hypotheses of Cummins (1976) explaining his “threshold hypothesis” as follows: The
level of L1 and L2 competence of a student determines if he or she will experience cognitive
deficit or benefits from schooling in the second language. On the other hand, Cummins
(1979) defines the “developmental interdependence hypothesis,” saying that when the use of
L1 is promoted by the child’s linguistic environment outside the school, then a high level of
L2 achievement is also likely to occur at no cost of L1 competence. L1 and L2 literacy skills
are seen to be interdependent, i.e. they are manifestation s of a “common underlying
proficiency.” High levels of L1 proficiency help L2 acquisition and conversely, high
proficiency in L2 has a positive effect on L1 development.

Slavin and Cheung’s review of the research (2000) found that literacy instructional
programs that use the ELL child’s native language or paired bilingual strategies for early
reading instruction were deemed effective in the majority of the studies examined.

Research Council (2000) conclusions:

 Learning builds on previous experiences (e.g. the importance of using
ELL students’ prior knowledge, culture, interests, and experiences in
new learning);
 Learning can be positively influenced by opportunities to interact ( the
social nature of learning);

5
  Knowledge taught in a variety of context is more likely to support
flexible transfer (e.g. the integration of ELL strategies across content
areas);
 Connected, organized and relevant information supports not only
remembering, but going beyond information to inferences and
conclusions (e.g. contextualized instruction, teaching higher-order skills,
use of certain strategies such a s graphic organizers);
 Feedback and active evaluation of learning furthers student
understanding and skills development; and
 Transfer of learning s an active process (e.g. active engagement of
students with the content to be learned.

Language Learning is a complex, non-linear process that affected by many

interrelated factors, so there is no “typical” ELL student. In many cases, classroom teachers
will be the primary instructors to help the students develop competent English literacy skills.
It is important then for these teachers to have a clear understanding of effective strategies to
help ELL students.

A research study of Burge (2012) compares the foreign language skills of secondary
school pupils in fourteen European countries. (Belgium tested its French, Flemish and
German communities separately, so there are results for sixteen jurisdictions). The survey’s
objectives are to provide information on the foreign language knowledge of pupils in
European countries; and to provide context information to policy makers and teachers,
covering culture, policies and practices.

The tested languages were the five most widely-taught in Europe: English, French,
German, Italian and Spanish. Each jurisdiction tested their pupils in two of these languages.
In England these were French and German. The survey assessed pupils’ ability to understand
spoken or written texts and express themselves in writing.

England’s performance was relatively poor, with most pupils only achieving the
lower CEFR levels and smaller proportions at the higher levels. However, England had
significantly fewer pupils at level Pre-A1 (below the level of basic user) than Sweden, Poland
and Greece in all three skills. England’s achievement in the second taught language (German)
is about as good as in its first language (French). The tested languages were the five most
widely taught in Europe: English, French, German, Italian and Spanish. Each jurisdiction
tested their pupils in two of these languages. In England these were French and German.

The Statement of the Problem

This study sought to answer the following:

1. What is the mother tongue of the respondents and the diverse languages they
use?
2. What proportion of respondents has adopted their mother’s and father’s mother
tongue?
3. What is the academic achievement of the respondent in their language skills
courses?

6
 4. Is there a significant difference in the language academic achievement of the
respondents whose MT is Iloco or Tagalog?
5. Is there a significant relationship between the diverse languages spoken by the
respondents and their language academic achievement?

Hypotheses:
There is no signidicant difference in the language academic achievement of the respondents
whose mother tongue is Iloco or Tagalog.

There is no significant relationship between the diverse languages spoken by the respondents
and their language academic achievement.

Conceptual/Theoretical Framework

CONCEPTUAL PARADIGM

CHILD Mother Tongue

Bilingualism

Multilingualism

Language Diversity
Language
Academic
Achievement

Figure1. The conceptual Paradigm of the study showing the interplay of mother tongue, bilingualism,
multilingualism and language diversity on the language academic achievement of the L2 learners.

The study embarks on the theory of Cummins (1998, 2006) which explains that the
development of competence in the mother tongue or first language (L1) serves as a
foundation of proficiency that can be transported to learning another language or second
language (L2).

Bilingualism/Multilingualism

Bilingualism is the ability of a person to speak two languages while multilingualism

is the ability to speak three or more languages be it actively (through speaking, writing, or
signing) or passively (through listening, reading, or perceiving). More specifically, the terms
bilingual and trilingual are used to describe comparable situations in which two or three
languages are involved. A multilingual person is generally referred to as a polyglot. Poly
(Greek: πoλύς means “many”, glot (Greek: γλώττα) means “language”.

7
The ability to use more than one language brings an individual a considerable advantage.
(www.sciencedaily.com.2009).

Language Academic Achievement – The outcome of learning a language course. It is the

extent to which a student, teacher or institution has achieved their educational goals.
Academic achievement is commonly measured by examinations or continuous assessment
but there is no general agreement on how it is best tested or which aspects are most important
- procedural knowledge such as skills or declarative knowledge such as facts.

In this paper, it is believed that the variables on mother tongue, bilingualism,

multilingualism, and language diversity play a role in the language academic achievement of
the learners.

Methodology

The Respondents

The study involved eighty-nine (89) English majors from 2nd, 3rd, and 4th year levels
taking up Bachelor in Secondary Education, First semester, SY 2012-2013 at the Philippine
Normal University, Isabela campus, Alicia, Isabela, Philippines.

The Research Design

The study utilized the descriptive- correlational research design to treat the variables
on the mother tongue, language diversity and language academic achievement of the
respondents.

The Instrument

The study utilized a survey-questionnaire on the languages spoken by the L2 learners

which was devised by the researcher herself. Official Permanent Records of the respondents
were obtained from the Office of the Registrar for their language academic achievement
variable. Their grade point averages in English 01 and English 02 language skills courses
were considered.

The Procedure

The researcher personally distributed/floated the survey-questionnaire to the

respondents. They were given one and a half hour to accomplish the form.

An informal interview with the respondents regarding their languages spoken was
likewise conducted.

The Statistical Tests

The research used the Chi-square and test of independence in analyzing the data.

8
 Results and Discussion

Question No. 1. What is the mother tongue of the respondents and the diverse languages they
use?

TABLE 1. The mother tongue of the respondents

Mother Tongue of the Respondents Frequency (n=89) Percent

Cebuana 1 1.10
Ifugao 1 1.10
Iloco 56 62.90
Tagalog 27 30.30
Ybanag 3 3.40
Ytawes 1 1.10

Majority of the respondents (56 or 62.90 percent) revealed that they use Iloco as their
mother tongue, 27 (30.30 percent) use Tagalog, use Ybanag; while one respondent each for
Cebuano, Ifugao and Ytawes. This means that majority of the respondents use Iloco as a
mother tongue 67 percent, while the remaining 37 percent was distributed in the other five
dialects/languages.

The table further reveals that the process of acculturation or moving from one
cultural identity to another (Kang, 2011) is evident among the ethnic groups in Region 02
which was revealed by the Tagalog speaking respondents 27 percent and one who uses
Cebuano/Visaya as a dominant mother tongue.

The respondents have adopted the beliefs and behaviors of another group. Although
acculturation is usually in the direction of a minority group adopting habits and language
patterns of the dominant group, acculturation can be reciprocal – that is, the dominant group
also adopts patterns typical of the minority group as revealed by the researcher’s interview
with them.

9
TABLE 2. The languages spoken by the respondents

Tagalog
English
Ilocano
Ybanag
Kapampangan
Yogad
Gaddang
Ifugao
Cebuano
Ytawes
Waray
Niponggo
Kalinga
Igorot
Bikol

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of Respondent (n=89)

The table shows the diverse languages spoken by the respondent s: All 89
respondents speak English and Filipino (Tagalog), while 88 of them speak Iloco. Next
is Ybanag with 20 speakers; 4 Kapampangan, 3 for both Gaddang and Yogad, 2 for
both Ifuagao and Cebuano, and 1 for the remaining languages – Ytawes, Waray,
Niponggo, Kalinga, Igorot, and Bikol.

In my interview with the respondents, ont of them cannot speak Iloco but she
jkcan understand simple words of the language. On the other hand, 100% of the
respondents speak, and understand fully well Tagalog (Filipino) since many of them
have been acculturated by neighbors, peers in school, media and technology and
English for these respondents are English majors themselves. The data show the
strong influence of English being the international language and Tagalog (Filipino),
being the national language of the Philippines.

Out of 89 respondents, 87 are polygots. They understand and speak three or

more languages and use them in a meaningful communication. One is bilingual. She
knows only 2 languages – Tagalog and English. No one is monolingual.

10
 Berbers and Slovenes as cited by Beecher, et al (2009) reported that language
differences are at the root of identity for many peoples. Language is concomitant with tribe or
ethnicity in many parts of the world and in some countries is a major factor defining
minorities.

The following are information about the indigenous groups included in the study:

Tagalog. The Tagalog is the most widely spread ethnic group in the Philippines that
inhabit Manila, Mindoro and Marinduque. There are about 22 million speakers of the Tagalog
language that was chosen as the official language of the nation in 1930.

Ilocano. The Ilocanos inhabit the lowlands and the coastal regions of Luzon. There
are 8 million individuals of this group. Most of them are Christians.

Bicolano. These are the descendants of the Austronesians who came to the region in
the Iron Age. They live in the peninsula of Luzon and speak the Bicol or the Bicolano
language. There are about 3.5 million speakers of this language.

Kapampangan. The Kapampangan people originated from the central plains of Luzon
starting from Bataan extending up to Nueva Ecija. There are more than 2 million members of
this group who are known to have been valiant soldiers in the Spanish colonial era.

Ibanag and Ifugaos are two one of the indigenous tribal groups of the Philippines.

Many people learn different languages as a result of migration. This includes young
immigrant children, whose families have moved to a new linguistic environment, as well as
people who learned their mother tongue as a young child at home who may have lost, in part
or in totality, the language they first acquired.

Question 2. What proportion of respondents has adopted their mother’s and father’s mother
tongue?

TABLE 3. The dominant mother tongue spoken by the respondents’ parents

Mother Tongue of the Mothers’ Mother Fathers’ Mother

Parents Tongue Tongue

F (n=89) Percent F(n=89) Percent

Bicolano 1 1.1 0 0.0
Cebuano 2 2.2 1 1.1
Gaddang 1 1.1 1 1.1
Hiligaynon 1 1.1 0 0.0

11
Ifugao 1 1.1 3 3.3
Iloco 63 70.8 61 68.5
Tagalog 12 13.5 10 11.2
Ybanag 6 6.7 8 9.0
Yogad 2 2.2 1 1.1
Kapampangan 0 0.0 2 2.2
Ytawes 0 0.0 1 1.1

Majority of the respondents’ mother (63 or 70.8 percent) and father (61 or 68.5
percent) use Iloco as their mother tongue, 12 or 13.5 percent of the mothers used Tagalog
while 10 or 11.2 percent for fathers. Six (6 or 6.7 percent of the mothers and 8 or 9.0 percent)
for fathers used Ybanag; while the rest of the mothers have 2 and 1 for Cebuano and Yogad
and Bicolano, Gaddang, Hiligaynon and Ifugao respectively. Meanwhile for fathers’ mother
tongue, data revealed that the rest fall on 3 or 3.3 percent Ifugao; 2 or 2.2.percent for
Kapampangan and 1 for Ytawes, Yogas, Gaaddang and Cebuano.

This means that majority of the respondents’ parents use Iloco as a mother tongue;
Tagalog being the second rank mother tongue.

The table further supports that indeed Iloco is the most frequently used lingua francca
in most part of the Region.

There are more than 8 million speakers of the Ilocano language, making it the third
most widely spoken language in the Philippines (http://www.ethnologue.com).

TABLE 4. Proportion of the respondents who adopted their mother’s mother tongue

Mother’s Mother Tongue

Ybanag,
Ytawes,
Mother Tongue Iloco Tagalog Yogad, Ifugao Others Total
(n=63) (n=12) Gaddang (n=1) (n=4)
(n=9)

Iloco 50 4 1 0 1 56
Tagalog 13 8 4 0 2 27
Ybanag, Ytawes, 0 0 4 0 0 4
Yogad, Gaddang
Ifugao 0 0 0 1 0 1
Others 0 0 0 0 1 1

12
64 out of 89 respondents adopted their mother’s mother tongue which means that there is
72% chance that a mother’s mother tongue is adopted by the child.

TABLE 5. Proportion of the respondents who adopted their father’s mother tongue

Father’s Mother Tongue

Ybanag,
Ytawes,
Mother Tongue Iloco Tagalog Yogad, Ifugao Others Total
(n=61) (n=10) Gaddang (n=3) (n=4)
(n=11)

Iloco 50 1 1 2 2 56
Tagalog 11 9 6 0 1 27
Ybanag, Ytawes, 0 0 4 0 0 4
Yogad, Gaddang
Ifugao 0 0 0 1 0 1
Others 0 0 0 0 1 1

64 out of 89 respondents adopted their father’s mother tongue which means that there is a 72
percent chance that the father’s mother tongue could be adopted by the child.

TABLE 6. Proportion of respondents adoption to parents’ mother tongue

Adopted Mother Tongue Frequency Percent x2

(n=33)

Father’s Mother Tongue 11 33.33%

Mother’s Mother 14 42.42% 1.64ns

Tongue

Others 8 24.24%

Statistical test showed that the adoption of mother tongue is uniformly distributed
(x20.05, 2 =1.64, p>0.05)

The result implies that there is no significant difference on the proportion or

likelihood of the respondents’ adoption of the mother tongue of both parents. However, the
slight 3 point gap between the percent of the parents implies that the mother has a stronger
influence upon the child than the father. This affectional tie becomes the template of all
relationships that the child goes on to form throughout his life. Clearly a mother’s work in the
first years of a child’s life has great importance (Bowlby, 1982). His contention is that as
child explores, usually through trial and error, s(he) will come to realize that his/her mother’s

13
limits have been instated to keep him/her safe and so will again come to trust the mother.
With this realization and resulting trust, the second stage of bonding is thus complete, but
through the affection that they share for each other the mother and child will also have
developed and attachment.

Question 3. What is the academic language achievement of the respondents in language skill
courses?

TABLE 7. Performance of the respondents in Academic Listening and Speaking11

Listening and Speaking Frequency Percent

Weak 75-79 3 3.4

Average 80-84 15 16.9

Satisfactory 85-89 38 42.7

Excellent 90-94 33 37.1

Minimum 77.00 Maximum 93.00

Mean 87.61 Standard deviation 3.97

The table shows that 38 or 42.7 percent of the respondents perform satisfactory; 33 or
37.1 percent are excellent; while 15 or 16.9 are average and only 3 or 3.4 percent are weak in
their listening and speaking skills. This means that majority of the L2 learners are performing
well in their English 01 course – Academic Listening and Speaking.

TABLE 8. Performance of the respondents in Academic Reading and Thinking

Skills
Reading Scores Frequency Percent
(n=89)

Weak 76-80 6 6.7

Average 81-85 25 28.1

Satisfactory 86-90 48 53.9

Excellent 91-95 10 11.2

14
Minimum 78.00 Maximum 92.00

Mean 85.61 Standard deviation 3.38

The table reveals that 48 or 53.9 percent of the respondents perform satisfactorily; 25
or 28.1 percent are excellent; while 10 or 11.2 percent are average and only 6 or 6.7 percent
are weak in their Reading and Thinking Skills.

Question 4. Is there a significant difference in the language academic achievement of the

respondents whose Mother tongue is Iloco or Tagalog?

TABLE 9. The language skills performance of the respondents whose mother

tongue is Iloco or Tagalog

Language Skills Mother Tongue t-value

Iloco Tagalog
(n=56) (n=27)
Mean S.D Mean S.D
Listening and Speaking 87.21 4.30 88.44 3.25 -1.31ns
Reading 85.30 3.69 86.56 2.76 -1.56ns
ns- not significant

For the listening and speaking skills of the respondents, the Iloco had a mean of
87.21 with a standard deviation of 4.30 while the Tagalog had 88.44 with a standard
deviation of 3.25.

In the Reading skills, the Iloco students had a mean of 85.30 with a standard
deviation of 3.69 while the Tagalog had 86.56 with a standard deviation of 2.76.
Though the performances of the Tagalog students are better in both listening and
speaking and reading, their performances are comparably equal (t 0.05, 81= -1.31, p>0.05). This
means that the slight difference in their standard deviation does not make any significance.

Question 5. Is there a significant relationship between respondents’ language diversity and

their language academic achievement?

TABLE 10. Relationship between the respondents’ Language diversiy and their
language skill performance

Listening and Speaking Reading & Thinking Skills

x2 p-value x2 p-value

Number of languages 4.71ns 0.97 8.18ns 0.77

Diverse 1.37ns 1.00 4.46ns 0.97
ns- Not significant *significant

15
 The above data show that there is no significant relationship between the language
diversity and the language academic achievement of the respondents as evident of the x 2 4.71
and 1.37 for listening and speaking and 8.18 and 4.46 x2 for the reading and thinking skills
respectively.
This implies that the research finding of Marsh (2009) which claims that the
multilinguals show superior performance in handling complex and demanding problem-
solving tasks and have an advantage in handling certain thinking processes is not evident in
this research.
However, the no significant relationship between the two variables means that there
are other factors that can affect the performance or the language academic achievement of the
respondents. Among others, these factors include motivation, intellectual ability, attention
spans, prior knowledge (www.ehow.com) environmental, instrumental, physical
circumstances and psychological conditions (www.scienceinquiry.org). Furthermore,
Thompson’s (2004) findings claim that teacher’s understanding and use of variety of
effective instructional strategies also support students language academic achievement.

Findings

1. Iloco is the dominant mother tongue of the respondents as well as their parents, both the
father and the mother.

2. Their diverse languages spoken by the respondents are as follows in (order): Tagalog(89);
English (89), Illoco (88), and Ybanag (20).

3. Among the respondents whose parents speak different MT, 14 out of 33 or 42.42% of the
respondents adopt their mother’s MT while 11 or 33.33% adapted their father’s MT and
almost a quarter did not use any of their parents’ MT.

4. The academic performance of the respondents in their language skills (Listening, speaking,
reading, and thinking skills is satisfactory.

5. There is no significant difference in the language skills performance of the respondents

whose MT is Iloco or Tagalog.

6. There is no significant relationship between the language diversity and language academic
achievement of the respondents.

Conclusions

1. Iloco is the most widely spoken dialect/lingua franca among students and parents.

2. Majority of the respondents have adopted their mother’s mother tongue than their father’s
mother tongue.

3. Majority of the respondents perform satisfactorily in language skills like listening,

speaking, reading, and thinking skills.

4. Even if Tagalog perform better in their language skills than Iloco, the difference if not that
significant.

16
5. The number of languages spoken by the respondents is not significant in acquiring skills in
listening, speaking, reading, and thinking skills as there may be other factors contributing to
the successful learning of the skills.

Recommendations

1. Conduct studies that will correlate language diversity with learning Mathematics and
Science.
2. Conduct the same study with wider scope of respondents using selective sampling
from other universities and colleges in the Region.
3. Conduct a correlation study with other respondents from other SUCs in the Region.
4. Devise/Use an instrument to measure the proficiency of the specific language skills
of the students.

17
 REFERENCES

Allman, Bohdana 2005, Proceedings of the 4th international symposium on bilingualism.

Cascadilla, Press, Somerville

August, D., & Hakuta, K. (Eds.). 1997. Improving schooling for language-minority children:
A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Beecher, N., MacGillivray, E., Golden, D., Hall, P., & Martinez, M. 2009. ORC Global
equality, diversity and inclusion: language diversity. ORC Worldwide, 500 Fifth
Avenue, New York, NY 10110 USA. Retrieved from https://www.orc-
netsafe.com/knowledgecenter/pdfs/language -diversity.pdf, on November 23, 2012.

Ben Zeev S. 1977a. The effects of Spanish-English bilingualism in children from less
priviledged neighborhoods on cognitive development and cognitive strategy.
Working Papers on Bilingualism, 14, 83-122.

Ben Zeev S. 1977b. The influence of bilingualism on cognitive strategy and cognitive
development. Child Development, 48, 1009-18.

Bialystok, E. 1991. Language processing in bilingual children. New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Bowlby, John.1982.Volume 1. Attachments and loss. Basic Books.London

Burge, B., Ager, R., Cunningham, R. and Wheater, R. 2012. European survey on Language
Competencies (ESLC): Initial Findings. National Foundation for Educational
Research. Department of Education Research Brief. DFE-RB222 ISBN
978 1 908666 28 4

Collier, Catherine 1998. Cognitive learning strategies for diverse learners. Theory and
applicatton for identifying differences in cognitive style and for using cognitive
learning strategies with culturally and linguistically diverse students. Cross Cultural
Development Education Services, Vancouver, WA

Collier, V. 1992. A synthesis of studies examining long-term language minority student data
on academic achievement. Bilingual Research Journal, 16(1-2), 187-212.

Collier V. 1995. Acquiring a second language for school. Directions in Language and
Education, 1(4). Available online:
http://www.ncbe.gwu.edu/ncbepubs/directions/04.htm

Crawford, L. 1993. Language and literacy in multicultural classrooms. Needham Heights,

MA: Allyn and Bacon.

18
Cuevas, J. A. 1997. Educating limited-English-proficient students: A review of the research
on school programs and classroom practices. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.

Cummins, Jim 2006. Identity texts: The Imaginative construction of self through
multiliteracies pedagogy. In Garcia, Ofelia, Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove & Torres-
Guzman, Maria (eds). Imagining Multilingual Schools. Languages in Education and
Globalization. Clevedon, Buffalo & Toronto: Multilingual Matters, 51-68.

Cummins, Jim. 1976. The influence of bilingualism on cognitive growth. A synthesis of

research findings and explanatory hypotheses. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 9, 1-
43.

Cummins, Jim. 1979. Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of

bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49 (2), 222-251.

Cummins, Jim. 1978. Language proficiency bilingualism and academic achievement.

Bilingualism and Special Education: Issues in Assessment and Pedagogy (San Diego)
130-151.

Cummins, Jim. 2000. Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire.
Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Cummins, Jim. 2012. Negotiating identities: education for empowerment in a diverse society,
Los Angelesm CA: California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE0

Doyle, A., Champagne, M., & Segalowitz, N. (1978). Some issues in the assessment of
linguistic consequences of early bilingualism. In M. Paradis (Ed.), Aspects of
bilingualism (pp. 13-21). Columbia, SC: Hornbeam Press.

Erlbaum, Lawrence Associates (United States). 2007. A journal of developmental linguistics.

ISSN 1048-9223 (print) and 1532-7817 (web)

Ferguson, Gail M. 2011 Ph.D. The influence of immigration in children and youth: Evidence
from Europe, Canada, and the United States. Department of Psychology, Knox
College, Illinois, USA gmfergus@knox.edu, http://faculty.knox.edu/gmfergus/cflstudy

Garcia, E. 1994. Understanding and meeting the challenge of student cultural diversity.
Boston:Houghton Mifflin.

Garcia, G.E. 1994. Assessing the literacy development of second language students: A focus
on authentic assessment. In K. Spangenbergk-Urbschat & R. Pritchard (Eds.), Kids
come in all languages: Reading instruction for ESL students (pp. 180-205). Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.

Genessee, F. 1987. Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual
education. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.

Gollnick, D.M., & Chinn, P.C. 2006. Multicultural education in a pluralist society (7th
ed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

19
Hakuta, Kenji 1986. Mirror of Language: The Debate on Bilingualism. Discussion and
research about bilingualism. New York: Basic Books

Hakuta, Kenji. (1990). Bilingualism and bilingual education: A research perspective.

Occassional Papers Series, No.1. Washington, DC: Naitonal Clearinghouse for
Bilingual Education.

International Reading Association & National Association for the Education of Young
Children. 1998. Learning to read and write: Developmentally appropriate practices
for youngchildren [Online]. Available:
http://www.naeyc.org/resources/position_statements/spread0.htm

Kang, Tanya A. 2011. The influence of trait mindfulness on the acculturation process in study
abroad: An examination of cross-cultural adaptation in the personal communicative
context of social support.

Lindfors, J. 1987. Children’s language and learning (2nd.ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.

Marsh, David. 2009. The contribution of multilingualism to creativity. International Research

Team. European Commission. UNICOM Education Center, University of Jyvaskyla,
Finland

Mwinsheikke, Halima M. 2003. Overcoming the language barrier: an in-depth study of the
Tanzania secondary school science teachers’ initiatives in coping with the English
Kiswahili dilemma in the teaching learning process. Gausdal Norway.

Ramirez, J.David, Sandra D. Yuen, and Dena R. Ramey. 1991. Final report: Longitudinal
study of structured immersion strategy, early-exit, and late-exit transitional bilingual
education programs for language minority children, Vol. 1 and 2. San Mateo, CA:
Aguirre International.

Ramires, J.D. 1992. Executive summary. Bilingual Research Journal 16 (1-62)

Salvin, R.E and A. Cheung. 2004. How do English language learners learn to read? In
educational leadership 61 (6):52-57.

Schumann, J., H. 1975. Social distance as a factor in second language acquisition.

Schumann, J., H.. 1978. The acculturation model for second language acquisition.

Snow, Catherine. 1998. Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, D.C.:
National Academy Press.

Terry, N. & Irving, M. 2010. Cultural and linguistic diversity: issues on education. “Special
Education for ALL Teachers,” 5th ed. By Colarusso and O’Rourke. Kendall Hunt
Publishing Co. www.kendallhunt.com/colarusso

20
Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. 1997. School effectiveness for language minority students
(NCBE Resource Collection Series, No. 9). Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse
for Bilingual Education. Available online:
http://www.ncbe.edu/ncbepubs/resource/effectiveness/index.htm

Thompson, Linda W. 2004. Literacy development for English language learners. Classroom
challenges in the NCLB age. CTB/McGraw Hill.
www.ehow.com/list_6609308_stages-language-development

www.rice.edu/projects/HispanicHealth/Acculturation.htm/

www.sciencedaily.com/release/2009/10/091029151807.htm

www.scribd.com/doc/130309218/TheInfluenceofMotherTongueinsecondlanguageacquisition

http://www.scienceinquiry.org/2013/08/factors-affecting-the-process-and-learning-outcomes/

http://www.ehow.com/info_8207913_factors-affect-individual-learning.html

http://joanofarcacademy.com/importance-of-bilingualism/

http://ec.europa.eu/languages/eslc/docs/england-national-summary-eslc_en.pdf

http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/reading/li7refer.htm (studies on L1
and L2)

http://www.buzzle.com/artticles/list-of-different-ethnic-groups-in-the-philippines.html

Fly Philippines. Retrieved 18 June 2011.

21