國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
83
(the Chinese teacher and homeroom teacher ), was because the international school aims to help their students to apply for universities overseas whose admission criteria depend not on the scores but rather on a variety of activities or students projects. It is why the international school decided not to put all attentions on the textbooks.
5.3. Implication of This Study
The present study has thrown light on how various factors influence a late immersion student’s learning experiences in the first semester. Factors leading to good adjustment function as a good model for parents, learners, and teachers to adopt or follow, while hindering factors act as a mirror for them to reflect upon
Good adjustment is said to depend on five types of variables in this study: the instructional language (English), familiarity, dynamic, self-efficacy, and learning strategies. For parents and learners who are on the point of transferring from a regular L1 program to a late immersing context, it is suggested that they could focus their attention working on these aspects which already seem productive and
facilitative for adjustment. One of the sharpest weapons to the war of surviving late immersion program is students’ second language, which is adopted as an
instructional language of the program. The first suggestion for learner and parents are the learning of English in advance, and the proficiency of English should pass
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
84
the threshold level (Cummins, 2000; Cummins et al., 2001) so that students can enhance their English proficiency and develop their academic competences while learning in an immersing context. In addition to the language proficiency, students should develop a right attitude toward a second language, that is, considering it as a tool rather than a subject. Such attitude could be encouraged through natural
exposure such as taking a trip to native-speaking countries, living abroad for a short period of time, or making international pen pal online.
Second, familiarity with the environment and the content knowledge is proved to facilitate the adjustment as well. Experiencing new things always involves risks, and late immersion students already have to deal with the switched instructional language and learning environment. Thus, if the learning environment of the new program is similar to what the learner used to experience, such as the layout of classroom, the classmates, and everything that is familiar to the students, they would be better able to get accustomed to the new environment. In Shelly’s case, going to a late immersion program that takes place in the same school does help a lot for her adjustment. And for the familiarity with the content knowledge, although other students might not be as lucky as Shelly to have the textbooks and contents overlapped, her story indicates the importance of background knowledge in academic areas. In other words, if possible, learners should be equipped with optimal academic knowledge to continue their educational path in a late immersion
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
85
program, since knowledge is transferable from one language to another (Cummins, 2000).
The third aspect for students, parents, and teachers to work on is to find the balance with the new environment, including the curriculum, the teachers, and the peers. Students and parents are recommended to know the goal of curriculum and agree with it in advance. Having a shared goal, the curriculum and the teachers are in the same boat with students and parents, which creates a better learning
interaction. On the top of that, the immersion teachers can also promote students’
adjustment by engaging students in a variety of learning tasks or promoting
cooperative and collaborative learning. Teacher’s teaching style and techniques are presented to be a significant indicator for students’ learning experiences.
Incorporation of hands-on activities, group work, jokes, and videos on teacher’s part increase students’ active participation in classroom; additionally, teacher can also promote a tight social group among students by implementing group work in the classroom, which encourages students to make sense of classroom by working through the problem together.
Furthermore, self-efficacy and the ability to employ learning strategies are highly required when students face challenges. As discussed in the present study, the higher sense of self-efficacy, the more flexible a student’s learning strategies may be.
Insight gained, the immersion teachers should offer manageable learning tasks for
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
86
students so that students can complete the tasks and obtain a sense of
accomplishment, which could lead the students to believe in their capability to do things. Moreover, teacher could also teach learning strategies to enhance students’
ability to take on challenges.
What is more, learning from Shelly’s story, we realize that learning at school is also a process of constant adjustment. Up until the final examination did Shelly find her learning of Chinese unbearable and not as expected. While Shelly was busy for exam preparation, her dissatisfaction of her L1 development turned into a conflict between herself and the Chinese teacher. Thus, it is suggested that when students could not find the balance between themselves with the curriculum and the teacher, negotiation between students and teachers, students and parents, and parents and teachers should be held, or conflict might arise and result in detrimental effects of learning. Therefore, a communication system to monitor students’ progress in learning is recommended, for regular and constant negotiation could promote the relationship between students, teachers, and parents. The quality of communication is also emphasized. Students and teachers are encouraged to put themselves in other’s shoes because having a communication without understanding each other’s belief of learning and teaching and needs might be meaningless.
Finally, the researcher brings back the language issues. For students’ L1 development, in terms of the design of Chinese course, it is proposed that the
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
87
committee of curriculum design should think twice if it is necessary to lower the L1 proficiency level in the Chinese course. Although applying universities overseas does not require flying scores with respects to students L1 proficiency, cultivating students’ L1 in immersion programs is still beneficial for students, as stressed by Larsen-Freeman (2000) that establishing literacy of students’ native language is momentous when it comes to learning content kwnoeldge through a second
language. If immersion students can receive L1 courses as solid as students in many other secondary schools, they are indirectly encouraged to value their native culture and to identify with it. On the other hand, concerning immersion teacher’s L2 proficiency, the accent in particular, both immersion teachers and students are encouraged to improve their L2 proficiency. More specifically, while immersion teachers try to accommodate their language to provide comprehensible input for students and to polish their accents, students should also get used to different accents for the reason that they are likely to meet a variety of international teachers giving classes overseas.
5.4. Limitations of This Study
This study has revealed that Shelly’s attitude toward and proficiency of English, her familiarity with the environment and content, and the learning dynamics of Shelly and the curriculum, the teachers, and the peers, and lastly her self-efficacy
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
88
and ability to implement learning strategies for challenges are influential in her adjustment to the late immersion program, the international school. However, the researcher still recognizes three aspects of limitation. Due to the accessibility of students and teachers in K school, the findings of this study are based on only one particular learner and her homeroom teacher, so the results of the present study might not be applied to a wider situation. Besides, the researcher mainly depends on Shelly’s and Mr. Chen’s self-report to analyze and organize the findings. If the researcher adds classroom observation in the collection of data, a more
comprehensive result could be presented. Lastly, the research only lasted for a semester, and the limited time for data collection appears to be the other weakness.
If the study lasted for a longer period of time, a better understanding of how and why Shelly adjusted to the new environment successfully or unsuccessfully can be explored with more depth.
5.5. Recommendation for Future Research
A few recommendations for future research direction are listed below. Firstly, involving a larger number of participants to conduct a larger scale exploration of immersion students’ learning experiences either through qualitative method or quantitative method so that a more comprehensive views could be gained.
Secondly, a combined method of data collection is desirable, for this study only
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
89
reveals a learner’s perception of learning experiences; yet, how a learner thinks does not present the whole story. Thus, future researchers are suggested to add classroom observation into their data collection method. If possible, more people needed to be interviewed, for instance, peers, teachers, and parents.
Thirdly, a prolonged study is encouraged to have a complete understanding of a learner’s learning experiences and factors influencing them. Lastly, given the fact that immersion program in Taiwan belongs to private institution, the curriculum design might vary. And the goal and the design of a curriculum are an influential factor for students’ learning acquisition. So it might be ideal to conduct a study that involves participants from two immersion programs held in different schools.
5.6. Conclusion
Immersion program has been a popular choice for learners to develop a high level of L2 and acquire content knowledge at the same time. However, learning experiences differ depending on the immersing context students are in and the learning style they possess. In the present study, the researcher has explored the learning experiences of Shelly, a grade eight student who just transferred from a secondary school to a late total immersion program. Shelly’s story reveals how her attitude toward English, her English proficiency, and her familiarity with the
environment and the content facilitate her adjustment the immersion program in the
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
90
first semester. Also, the interaction between Shelly and the curriculum, the teachers, and the peers are uncovered. Three factors are found to enhance Shelly’s adjustment.
One is a shared educational goal between Shelly and the curriculum; another is the shared style of teaching and learning between the teachers and Shelly; the other is a tight social group embracing cooperative and collaborative learning that Shelly involved in. Moreover, a combined power of Shelly’s high sense of self-efficacy and the ability to adopt learning strategies for the adjustment is presented. The last concern focuses on Shelly’s L1 development. Achieving a high score of the Chinese exam does not satisfy her because she fails to develop the Chinese competences as expected. Through illustrating Shelly’s story, the researcher provides an insider’s view of a late total immersion student’s learning experiences in the first semester, and thereby, we wish all immersion students have fulfilling rewards.
‧
Bailey, K. M. (1980). An introspective analysis of an individual's language learning experience. In Scarcella, R. C., & Krashen, S. D. (Eds.). Research in Second Language Acquisition: Selected Papers of the Los Angeles Second Language Acquisition Research Forum.(PP.58-65). Rowley, MA, Newbury House.
Bailey, K. M., & Ochsner, R. (1983). A methodological review of the diary studies:
Windmill tilting or social science. Second language acquisition studies, 188-198.
Baker, C. (2011). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Tonawanda, N.Y.: Multilingual matters.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York : W.H.
Freeman.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 41(3), 586.
Bournot-Trites, M., & Reeder, K. (2001). Interdependence revisited: Mathematics achievement in an intensified French immersion program. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58(1), 27-43.
Cammarata, L., & Tedick, D. J. (2012). Balancing content and language in
instruction: The experience of immersion teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 251-269.
Cazden, C., & Snow, C. (1990). English Plus: Issues in bilingual education.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Chen, A.-h. (2013). An Evaluation on Primary English Education in Taiwan: From the Perspective of Language Policy. English Language Teaching, 6(10), 158-165.
Chen, Y.-L. (2006). The Influence of Partial English Immersion Programs in Taiwan on Kindergartners’ Perceptions of Chinese and English Languages and Cultures. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 8(1),7-40.
Cummins, J. (1978). The Cognitive Development of Children in Immersion Programs. Canadian Modern Language Review, 34(5), 855-883.
Cummins, J. (1980). The entry and exit fallacy in bilingual education. NABE journal, 4(3), 25-59.
Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy: College-Hill Press San Diego, CA.
Cummins, J. (1987). Immersion programs: Current issues and future directions.
Contemporary educational issues: The Canadian mosaic. Toronto, Copp Clark Pitman, 192-206.
Cummins, J. (2000). Immersion education for the millennium: What we have
‧
learned from 30 years of research on second language immersion. In M. R.
Childs & R. M. Bostwick (Eds.). Learning through two languages: Research and practice. Second Katoh Gakuen International Symposium on Immersion and Bilingual Education. (pp. 34-47). Katoh Gakuen, Japan.
Cummins, J., Baker, C., & Hornberger, N. H. (2001). An introductory reader to the writings of Jim Cummins. Buffalo, N.Y.: Multilingual Matters.
Cummins, J., & Swain, M. (1986). Bilingualism in education: Aspects of theory, research and practice. New York : Longman.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31(1), 182-204.
De Courcy, M. (2002). Learners' experiences of immersion education: Case studies of French and Chinese. England: Multilingual Matters.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fortune, T. W., & Tedick, D. J. (2008). One-way, two-way and indigenous immersion: A call for cross-fertilization. In Fortune, T. W., & Tedick, D. J.
(Eds.) Pathways to multilingualism: Evolving perspectives on immersion education (pp.3-21). Clevedon; Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.
García, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective.
Oxford, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell Pub.
García, O., & Baker, C. (2007). Bilingual education: An introductory reader.
Buffalo, N.Y.: Multilingual Matters.
Genesee, F. (1985). Second language learning through immersion: A review of US programs. Review of educational research, 55(4), 541-561.
Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual education. Boston, Mass. : Heinle & Heinle
Hoare, P. (2008). Late immersion in Hong Kong: Still stressed or making progress?
In Fortune, T. W., & Tedick, D. J. (Eds.) Pathways to multilingualism:
Evolving perspectives on immersion education (pp.245-259). Clevedon;
Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.
Johnson, R. K., & Swain, M. (1994). From core to content: Bridging the L2
proficiency gap in late immersion. Language and Education, 8(4), 211-229.
Johnstone, R. (2007). Processes of Immersion Education. In García, O., & Baker, C.(Eds.). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global
perspective(pp.165-175 ). Oxford, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell Pub.
Kong, S. (2009). Content-Based Instruction: What Can We Learn from
Content-Trained Teachers’ and Language-Trained Teachers’ Pedagogies?
Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(2), 233-267.
Kong, S., & Hoare, P. (2012). The Development of Academic Language Proficiency:
Challenges for Middle School Immersion in Hong Kong and Xi'an.
‧
International Education, 41(2), 88-109.
Krashen, S. (2003). Dealing with English fever. Paper presented at the twelfth international symposium on English teaching. English Teachers' Association, ROC, Taipei
Krashen, S. D. (1984). Immersion: Why it works and what it has taught us.
Language and Society, 12(1), 61-64.
Lambert, W. E., & Tucker, G. R. (1972). Bilingual education of children: The St.
Lambert experiment. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House Publishers.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York : Oxford university press.
Lazaruk, W. (2007). Linguistic, academic, and cognitive benefits of French immersion. Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(5), 605-627.
Li, B. (2008). Preparing Students for Late Immersion in L2--An Experience from a Language Enrichment Programme in Post-colonial Hong Kong. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 17(2), 121-141.
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A
counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam ; Philadelphia : John Benjamins.
Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE: the European Dimension : Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential: European Commission.
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Kong, C.-K. (2000). Late immersion and language of instruction in Hong Kong high schools: Achievement growth in language and nonlanguage subjects. Harvard Educational Review, 70(3), 302-347.
Ministry of Education, Taiwan. (2009). Public educational expenditures by governments.Taipei: Ministry of Education.
Nunan, D., & Bailey, K. M. (2009). Exploring second language classroom research:
A comprehensive guide. Boston : Heinle Cengage Learning.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods.Newbury Park, Calif: Sage
Pavlenko, A. (2007). Autobiographic narratives as data in applied linguistics.
Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 163-188.
Ranney, S. (1992). Learning a new acript: An exploration of sociolinguistic competence. Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 25-50.
Scarcella, R. C., & Krashen, S. D. (1980). Research in Second Language Acquisition:
Selected Papers of the Los Angeles Second Language Acquisition Research Forum. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Snow, M. A. (2001). Content-based and immersion models for second and foreign language teaching. Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 3, 303-318.
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
94
Stella Kong, S. K. (2008). Late Immersion in Hong Kong: A Pedagogical
Framework for Integrating Content-Language Teaching and Learning. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 5(3), 107-132.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1981). Bilingual education in Ontario: A decade of research. Toronto: Ontario.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1982). Evaluating Bilingual Education: A Canadian Case Study. Clevedon, Avon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Swain, M., & R.K. Johnson (1997). Immersion education: a category within bilingual education. In R.K. Johnson and M. Swain (eds.), Immersion education:
international perspectives(pp.1-16). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tang, H.-W. V. (2011). Optimizing an immersion ESL curriculum using analytic hierarchy process. Evaluation and program planning, 34(4), 343-352.
Turnbull, M., Lapkin, S., Hart, D., & Swain, M. (1998). Time on task and immersion graduates’ French proficiency. French second language education in Canada:
Empirical studies, 31-55.
Watkins, D., Biggs, J., & Regmi, M. (1991). Does confidence in the language of instruction influence a student's approach to learning? Instructional Science, 20(4), 331-339.
Zuengler, J. (1993). Encouraging learners' conversational participation: The effect of content knowledge. Language learning, 43(3), 403-432.