L2 LEARNERS’ MOTHER TONGUE, LANGUAGE DIVERSITYAND 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 LearningMother 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 LanguageThe 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 AcculturationSecond 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

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

CHILD Mother Tongue

Language Academic

Achievement

Bilingualism

Multilingualism

Language Diversity

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

Bikol

Igorot

Kalinga

Niponggo

Waray

Ytawes

Cebuano

Ifugao

Gaddang

Yogad

Kapampangan

Ybanag

Ilocano

English

Tagalog

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 Parents

Mothers’ Mother Tongue

Fathers’ Mother Tongue

F (n=89) Percent F(n=89) PercentBicolano 1 1.1 0 0.0Cebuano 2 2.2 1 1.1Gaddang 1 1.1 1 1.1Hiligaynon 1 1.1 0 0.0

11

Ifugao 1 1.1 3 3.3Iloco 63 70.8 61 68.5Tagalog 12 13.5 10 11.2Ybanag 6 6.7 8 9.0Yogad 2 2.2 1 1.1Kapampangan 0 0.0 2 2.2Ytawes 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 56Tagalog 13 8 4 0 2 27Ybanag, Ytawes, 0 0 4 0 0 4Yogad, GaddangIfugao 0 0 0 1 0 1Others 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 TongueYbanag,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 56Tagalog 11 9 6 0 1 27Ybanag, Ytawes, 0 0 4 0 0 4Yogad, GaddangIfugao 0 0 0 1 0 1Others 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(n=33)

Percent x2

Father’s Mother Tongue 11 33.33%

Mother’s Mother Tongue

14 42.42% 1.64ns

Others 8 24.24%

Statistical test showed that the adoption of mother tongue is uniformly distributed (x2

0.05, 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(n=89)

Percent

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-valueIloco(n=56)

Tagalog(n=27)

Mean S.D Mean S.DListening and Speaking 87.21 4.30 88.44 3.25 -1.31nsReading 85.30 3.69 86.56 2.76 -1.56nsns- 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 (t0.05, 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 Skillsx2 p-value x2 p-value

Number of languages 4.71ns 0.97 8.18ns 0.77Diverse 1.37ns 1.00 4.46ns 0.97ns- 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.

16

4. Even if Tagalog perform better in their language skills than Iloco, the difference if not that significant.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 Globalequality, diversity and inclusion: language diversity. ORC Worldwide, 500 FifthAvenue, 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 lesspriviledged 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 ISBN978 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.

19

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.

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.

20

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

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