CUMMINS MultilingualismEnglishlanguageClassroom 2009
CUMMINS MultilingualismEnglishlanguageClassroom 2009
CUMMINS MultilingualismEnglishlanguageClassroom 2009
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/27785008?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TESOL Quarterly
REFERENCE
Fishman, J. A. (1966). Language loyalty in the United States: The maintenance and perpetu
ation of non-English mother tongues by American ethnic and religious groups. The Hague,
The Netherlands: Mouton.
This article addresses the issue of whether TESOL should clearly artic
ulate a set of pedagogical principles that challenge the assumption that
English language teaching (ELT) should be conducted monolingually
through English. This monolingual principle (Howatt, 1984) emphasizes
instructional use of the target language (TL) to the exclusion of stu
dents' home language (LI), with the goal of enabling learners to think
in the TL with minimal interference from the LI. The monolingual prin
ciple initially gained widespread acceptance more than 100 years ago
in the context of the direct method and has continued to exert a strong
influence on various language teaching approaches since that time (Yu,
2000).
There are strong empirical and theoretical reasons to challenge
the monolingual principle and articulate a set of bilingual instruc
tional strategies that more adequately address the challenges of English
language and academic development. The focus is on school contexts
rather than on the teaching of English to adults, but similar arguments
are equally relevant in many adult learning contexts (e.g., Auerbach,
1993).
Recent methods do not so much forbid the LI as ignore its existence alto
gether. Communicative language teaching and task-based learning meth
ods have no necessary relationship with the LI, yet. . . the only times the
LI is mentioned is when advice is given on how to minimize its use. The
main theoretical treatments of task-based learning do not, for example,
have any locatable mentions of the classroom use of the LI. . . . Most
descriptions of methods portray the ideal classroom as having as little of
the LI as possible, essentially by omitting reference to it. (p. 404)
Cook (2001) argues for judicious use of the LI in the teaching of sec
ond and foreign languages but cautions that despite the legitimacy of
using the LI under certain conditions, "it is clearly useful to employ large
quantities of the L2, everything else being equal" (p. 413).
CONCLUSION
THEAUTHOR
Auerbach, E. (1993). Reexamining ESL only in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly,
27, 9-32.
Baron, N., Chow, P., Dale, V., Kelly, A., Solomon, B., Wong, B., et al. (2001). The dual
language showcase. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Thornwood Public School.
Retrieved May 30, 2009, from http://thornwood.peelschools.org/Dual/.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind,
experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. Canadian Modern Language
Review, 57, 402-423.
Cummins, J. (2001). Negotiating identities: Education for empowerment in a diverse society
(2nd Ed.). Los Angeles: California Association for Bilingual Education.
Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual
classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10, 221-240.
Esser, H. (2006). Migration, language, and integration (AKI Research Review 4). Berlin:
Social Science Research Center, Programme on Intercultural Conflicts and Societal
Integration (AKI). Retrieved December 21, 2007, from http://www.wzb.eu/
zkd/aki/files/aki_research_review_4.
Garcia, O. (2008). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Boston:
Blackwell.
Howatt, A. (1984). A history of English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Laufer, B., 8c Kimmel, M. (1997). Bilingual dictionaries: How learners really use them.
System, 19, 217-224.
Lucas, T., 8c Katz, A. (1994). Reframing the debate: The roles of native languages in
English-only programs for language minority students. TESOL Quarterly, 28,
537-562.
Luppescu, S., 8c Day, R. R. (1993). Reading, dictionaries, and vocabulary learning.
Language Learning, 43, 263-287.
Malakoff, M., 8c Hakuta, K. (1991). Translation skills and metalinguistic awareness in
bilinguals. In E. Bialystok (Ed.), Language processing in bilingual children (pp. 141
166). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Manyak, P. C. (2004). "What did she say?": Translation in a primary-grade English
immersion class. Multicultural Perspectives, 6(1), 12-18.
The Multiliteracy Project, (n.d.). Retrieved May 31, 2009, from http://www
.multiliteracies.ca/ index.php.
Nagy, W. E., Garcia, G. E., Durgunoglu, A., 8c Hancin-Bhatt, B. (1993). Spanish
English bilingual students' use of cognates in English reading. Journal of Reading
Behavior, 25, 241-259.
Orellana, M. E, Reynolds, J., Dorner, L., 8c Meza, M. (2003). In other words:
Translating or "para-phrasing" as a family literacy practice in immigrant house
holds. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 12-34.
Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Porter, R. P. (1990). Forked tongue: The politics of bilingual education. New York: Basic
Books.
Prince, P. (1996). Second language vocabulary learning: The role of context versus
translations as a function of proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 80, 478-493.
Reyes, M. de la Luz. (2001). Unleashing possibilities: Biliteracy in the primary grades.
In M. de la Luz Reyes &J. Halcon (Eds.), The best for our children: Critical perspectives
on literacy for Latino students (pp. 96-121). New York: Teachers College Press.
Yu, W. (2000). Direct method. In M. Byram (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of language
teaching and learning (pp. 176-178). New York: Routledge.