Читать книгу English in Inclusive Multilingual Preschools - Kirsten Birsak de Jersey - Страница 17

The first prompt in the questionnaire directly aimed at asking teachers to reflect on issues that they related to introducing English by taking the perspective of the children:

How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? (Wie beurteilen Sie das Lernen einer Fremdsprache im Kindergarten aus Sicht der Kinder? Eher als Vorteil oder eher als Nachteil?) (question 3a).

This was followed by confronting the preschool teachers with popular ideas which are prevalent and widely heard when the issue of learning English in preschool is discussed both in their social contexts and their contexts of work. The question of introducing another language in preschool (here: English) is an issue as many preschool children need to learn German as their second or third language. In order to remain unbiased, the commonly heard statements were presented in the questionnaire as original statements rather than transformed into questions to mark them clearly as public opinion. Therefore, the next question was asked as follows:

There are a number of personal everyday opinions you come across about introducing English in preschool. What is your attitude in the matter? (Im Alltag hört man immer wieder die folgenden persönlichen Meinungen über Englischunterricht im Kindergarten. Wie stehen Sie dazu?) (question 3b):

 Children should learn German first (Die Kinder sollten zuerst Deutsch lernen) (question 3b-1).

 Introducing English in preschool is a benefit for other languages as well, including German (Englischlernen im Kindergarten ist eine Bereicherung auch für die anderen Sprachen, einschl. dem Erlernen der deutschen Sprache) (question 3b-2).

 An additional language would burden many children, because preschool life is challenging enough for them (Eine Sprache zusätzlich würde viele Kinder überfordern, weil der Alltag des Kindergartens ohnehin schon eine Herausforderung für sie ist) (question 3b-3).

 Children learn a language in a playful way. If a further language (e.g., English) is offered in a child-appropriate way, children will experience that learning languages is fun and consequently they will be relaxed and open for the new experience (Kinder lernen eine Sprache auf spielerische Art. Wenn eine weitere Sprache (z. B. Englisch) kindgerecht angeboten wird, erfahren die Kinder Sprachenlernen als Spaß und sind dabei entspannt und offen für die neue Erfahrung) (question 3b-4).

The data shows that just over three quarters of the preschool teachers agreed in principle that it was an advantage to learn a foreign language at this young age (83.2%) (→ statistical data 10). However, the statistic shows that up to two thirds of all the participating teachers believed that the children who speak other languages would need to learn German before a foreign language (in other words English) could be introduced (64.5%) (→ statistical data 11). There is a discrepancy here. While a high percentage of preschool teachers believed that early foreign language learning was an advantage, this percentage was also high due to the belief that German should be learnt first. The data on the one hand demonstrates preschool teachers’ concern that children would need to learn German but at the same time they think that teaching children another foreign language in preschool would generally be a good idea. In other words, preschool teachers found themselves in a dilemma whether to prioritize German over English, but they were not against introducing foreign languages (including English) in preschools in principle. Therefore, I could assume that introducing English would not necessarily be a fundamental, categorical concern to them.

Figure 11:

Statistical data 10: A foreign language in preschool: an advantage or a disadvantage for the child?

Figure 12:

Statistical data 11: Comment on the public opinion “Children should learn German first before English is introduced”

When reviewing the reasons preschool teachers gave to support their opinion on German first, the predominant arguments were that German is the official language in children’s social environment and therefore learning German would need to have priority over any other foreign language learnt in preschool. While preschool teachers’ attitudes clearly correspond with Austrian early language policies (→ chapter 2.2.2), their idea that consecutive foreign language learning is best for the children (first German – then English) is not in line with early language acquisition research results (→ chapter 2.1). Consequently, this misconception would need to be addressed in the teacher education project for preschool teachers to be able to reassess their initial attitudes accordingly.

The following quotes relate to this role of languages in preschool and are representative of the majority of participating teachers’ attitudes:

“Zuerst Deutsch, weil in diesem Land Deutsch geredet wird. Englisch danach sehe ich als Bereicherung” (qu. 3b-1: yes).

“Wir sind in einem deutschsprechenden Land → entsprechend gute Kenntnisse sind Voraussetzung!” (qu. 3b-1: yes).

“In unserem Betrieb steht das Erlernen von Deutsch eher im Vordergrund, daher wäre Englisch zusätzlich zu viel” (qu. 3a: disadvantage).

“Festigung der Muttersprache und Deutschförderung stehen im Vordergrund” (qu. 3a: disadvantage).

More specifically it could be found that teachers’ attitudes for or against introducing English were closely related to the competence level the children had achieved in German, but their comments generally confirm the above presented attitude of German first:

“Wenn Deutsch die erste Sprache der Kinder ist, finde ich Englischunterricht gut. Die Kinder in dieser Altersgruppe lernen spielerisch, wenn das Angebot altersgemäß ist, und der Spaßfaktor gegeben ist!” (qu. 3a: advantage).

“Kinder lernen eine weitere Sprache im Kindergartenalter sehr leicht, ganzheitlich, mit allen Sinnen – spielerisch. Aber Kinder mit Migrationshintergrund sollten zuerst mal die 1. Fremdsprache (Deutsch) erlernen, Konfrontation mit zwei neuen Sprachen ist zu viel” (qu. 3a: advantage).

“Für sprachbegabte Kinder ist es sicher eine Bereicherung, für die anderen, welche schon mit 2 Sprachen Probleme haben, ist ein Erfolg nicht möglich” (qu. 3a: advantage).

“Bevor Deutsch als zweite Sprache nicht gut ausgebildet ist, sehe ich keinen Sinn darin, eine dritte Sprache anzubieten” (qu. 3b-1: yes).

“Aber nur wenn die Kinder bereits Deutsch können. Sie lernen im Kindergartenalter leicht und spielerisch” (qu. 3a: advantage).

“Für Kinder, die Probleme haben Deutsch zu lernen, ist der erweiterte Spracherwerb nicht sinnvoll” (qu. 3a: no answer).

“Die allgemeine Situation bei uns im Kindergarten eignet sich nicht für eine weitere Fremdsprache, da bei uns die meisten Kinder bei Eintritt in den Kindergarten das erste Mal Kontakt mit Deutsch haben” (final comment).

“Viele Kinder kommen in den Kindergarten mit einem Misch-Masch aus Deutsch und ihrer Muttersprache. Wobei zuerst die Muttersprache gefestigt sein sollte oder eine klare Trennung der Sprachen zu Hause gelernt werden soll. Da das Deutsche in der Schule dringend notwendig ist, ist eine Verbesserung des Deutschen im Kindergarten vorzuziehen (qu. 3b-1: yes). Wenn ein Kind eine Sprache gut kann, erlernt es eine zweite leichter und jede weitere Sprache ist eine Bereicherung” (qu. 3b-2: partly).

“Manchen Kindern würden zwei Fremdsprachen wohl zu viel werden, wenn sie nebenbei erst die neue Lebenssituation meistern müssen” (qu. 3b-1: partly).

“Ja, ist eigentlich zutreffend → deshalb teilweise, weil wir sehr viele Kinder mit Migrationshintergrund haben die sich noch schwer in Deutsch tun und die Eltern oft nur die Muttersprache sprechen!” (qu. 3b-1: partly).

A further concern that preschool teachers associated with the idea of introducing a foreign language in preschool, however, was not directly related to the need to learn German first, but teachers were also worried that there were children who had not yet acquired their mother tongue competently. Subsequently this could mean that these children would have to deal with learning three languages at the same time (mother tongue, German and English), which teachers considered to be too demanding for the child:

“Wichtig ist eine gefestigte Muttersprache – dann können mehrere Sprachen gleichzeitig erlernt werden – natürlich ist für „uns“ die Sprache Deutsch ein besserer Anknüpfungspunkt, weil kaum einer die Muttersprachen der Kinder kann” (qu. 3b-1: partly).

“Nicht deutschsprachige Kinder sprechen häufig die eigene Muttersprache nicht richtig, sollen dann Deutsch lernen und noch eventuell Englisch? Fraglich??” (qu. 3b-2: partly).

“In unserem Betrieb ist es durch die fehlerhafte Ausbildung der Muttersprache (in sehr vielen Fällen!) schon eine sehr große Herausforderung für die Kinder eine zweite Sprache (Deutsch) zu lernen” (qu. 3a: disadvantage).

“Ihre Muttersprache soll gefestigt sein” (qu. 3b-1: partly).

“Kinder sollten zuerst ihre Muttersprache beherrschen” (qu. 3b-1: partly).

“Wenn es die 3. Sprache ist, wird es schwierig” (qu. 3b-1: partly).

“Den Kindern, die vielleicht noch gar nicht Deutsch beziehungsweise nur wenig Deutsch können, wird das vielleicht zu viel” (qu. 3b-1: partly).

Preschool teachers who considered it an advantage to learn another foreign language commented without compromising their choice through focusing on German as a second language:

“Ich bin der Meinung, dass Kinder in diesem Alter mehrere Sprachen lernen können, wenn die aktiv erlebt werden und im Kindergartenalltag gesprochen und spielerische erlebt werden” (qu. 3a: advantage).

“Es können beide Sprachen parallel gelernt werden. Englisch könnte auch spielerisch im Tagesablauf eingebaut und so erlernt werden” (qu. 3b-1).

It may come as some surprise that this last positive comment came from a preschool teacher in whose group 20 children out of 22 learnt German as a second language.

As has been said above, my teacher education project would need to address the prevalent idea that the consecutive learning of languages qualifies as the appropriate approach that the majority of preschool teachers expressed. This understanding has been described to be a widely cherished myth by language acquisition researchers. Referring to Gogolin (1994), who quite some time ago criticised the prevalent monolingual mind-set of parents and teachers and argued for a multilingual understanding of education instead, Tracy (2008) wrote:

Das mehr oder weniger friedliche Zusammenleben mehrerer Sprachen im Kinderkopf verträgt sich anscheinend schlecht mit unseren Alltagsweisheiten und hartnäckigen Mythen über Spracherwerb und Mehrsprachigkeit. … Es passt nicht zum monolingualen Habitus (Gogolin 1994), auf den Punkt gebracht also zur Vorstellung: ein Kopf – eine Sprache. Außerdem zwingt es uns, liebgewordene Mythen loszulassen. (p. 113; in a chapter on ‘Warum erregt der doppelte Erstsprachenerwerb die Gemüter’; italics in original)

But what would preschool teachers think about introducing English in preschool: would they consider it to be an asset for other languages to be learnt, including German as a second language? The data shows that over a quarter of the teachers considered it to be an asset and just under a quarter believed that this would not be the case. Almost half of the preschool teachers were undecided on the question (→ statistical data 12).

Figure 13:

Statistical data 12: Comment on the public opinion “Introducing English in preschool is an asset also for other languages, including German”

The teachers who did not agree that introducing English would be an asset for other languages were – from what has been said, not very surprisingly – mostly concerned that the children would primarily need to learn German and also their mother tongue. They agreed that the experience of learning a foreign language would support the children when they learn another language. However, at the same time they said that preschool children would only benefit from learning another foreign language after they were competent in German:

“Nur, wenn die Kinder schon gut Deutsch können wäre es eine Bereicherung” (qu. 3b-2: no).

“Nicht in einem Kindergarten mit ca. 90 % unterschiedlichen fremdsprachigen Kindern” (qu. 3b-2: no).

“Es ist für später eine Bereicherung mehr Sprachen zu können” (qu. 3b-2: no).

“Erst sollte die deutsche Sprache erlernt sein, weitere können folgen” (qu. 3b-2: no).

“Wenn die Kinder zwischen drei Sprachen jonglieren müssen, finde ich das nicht gut. Als einsprachiges Kind mit großer Freude und Sprachbegabung eventuell” (qu. 3b-2: no).

“Nur für deutschsprachige Kinder” (qu.3b-2: no).

“Die Kinder wären mit drei Sprachen überfordert!” (qu. 3b-2: no).

There was also about a quarter of the preschool teachers (25.7%) (→ statistical data 12) who argued that the process of learning German would benefit if another foreign language was introduced. They referred to the English words that are frequently used in German and said children enjoyed learning many languages:

“Viele neue englische Wörter und Bedeutungen verwenden wir auch im Deutschen” (qu. 3b-2: yes).

“Kinder haben Freude am Sprechen vieler Sprachen, da dies lustbetont geschieht!” (qu. 3b-2: yes).

10 of the 15 teachers who did not answer the question felt overwhelmed by it and simply included a number of question marks instead of answering the question or they quite openly admitted that they simply had no idea about the subject:

“Dazu kann ich leider nichts sagen, weil ich nicht weiß wie es sich auswirkt. Ich könnte mir allerdings vorstellen, dass die Kinder die falsche Satzstellung übernehmen werden, von Englisch auf Deutsch” (qu. 3b-2: no answer).

“Weiß ich nicht” (qu. 3b-2: no answer).

The next question (→ question 3b-3) was to find out if teachers felt that learning a foreign language in preschool would be a burden for the children because preschool life in itself was challenging enough for them to cope with. Results were heterogeneous: while 30.6% of the teachers confirmed this idea, 19.8% felt that the children would not be burdened and about half of the teachers (49.6%) had mixed views and marked partly in the questionnaire (→ statistical data 13). As the majority of the preschool teachers were undecided, no valid answer to this question can be presented here.

Figure 14:

Statistical data 13: Comment on the public opinion “An additional language in the preschool would burden children because preschool life is challenging enough for them”

Preschool teachers’ explanatory comments for their choices if they opted for yes or partly in the questionnaire indicated that they viewed children’s low level of German as a cause for preschool life being too challenging to introduce another language. Again, this strongly supports the validity of the questionnaire as this corresponds with the reasons that preschool teachers gave in answering the other prompts in question 3b). It was apparent that the majority of the answers of partly agree were prompted by the distinction the teachers made between the children who were in the early process of learning German and the children who could speak German already. They also were concerned that some children had deficits in other areas as well which would contradict the introduction of another language:

“Eher die nicht deutschsprechenden Kinder” (qu. 3b-3: partly).

“Bei vielen Kindern ist die Muttersprache noch ein Problem und Deutsch erst recht. Noch eine Sprache dazu wäre zu viel. Ist die erste Sprache gefestigt und das „Regelwerk Sprache“ angekommen, sind mehrere Sprachen kein Problem” (qu. 3b-3: partly).

“Viele kommen mit wenig Sprachkenntnissen und auch großen Defiziten aus anderen Gebieten. Ein zu viel an Angeboten könnte einige Kinder überfordern” (qu. 3b-3: partly).

“Kommt auf das Sprachverständnis jedes einzelnen Kinders an” (qu.3b-3: partly).

“Speziell für Migrantenkinder” (qu. 3b-3: partly).

Apart from considering children’s language competence levels they also reflected individual children’s different abilities and aptitudes when commenting on their choice of partly agree. They also maintained that coping would depend on the contextual support provided for the child, either by their parents or the preschool:

“Kommt auf die individuelle Begabung des Kindes, Förderung von zu Hause etc. an” (qu. 3b-3: partly).

“Kommt natürlich auf die Begabung und Einrichtung an” (qu. 3b-3: partly).

“Stimmt wohl für manche. Aber jedes Kind ist anders!” (qu. 3b-3 partly).

But what would preschool teachers think if a further language (e.g., English) were offered in a child-appropriate, playful way and consequently children would then experience that learning languages is fun and as a result they would be open for the new experience? The data shows that the majority of the teachers (85.4%) agreed that the children learnt languages in a playful way, which left only a small percentage of preschool teachers who answered partly (14.6%). None of the preschool teachers answered with no (→ statistical data 14).

Figure 15:

Statistical data 14: Comment on the public opinion “Children learn a language in a playful way”

Preschool teachers who answered partly were again generally concerned about the children who were learning German as a second language. But at the same time, they thought that through introducing a foreign language that was unfamiliar to all of the children in a group, German native-speaking children would be able to experience the challenges involved in learning a language – an everyday experience for their peers who are largely non-native speakers of German:

“Außerdem verstehen die Kinder mit Muttersprache Deutsch dann, wie schwer es für Kinder mit Fremdsprache ist Deutsch zu lernen und umgekehrt, sind alle Kinder mal auf dem gleichen Level! Auch Kinder mit nicht Deutsch-Muttersprache können zeigen was sie können, ihr Auffassungsvermögen ist sehr gut” (qu. 3b-4: yes).

The comments of the other teachers who opted for yes or partly did not provide any substantial answers apart from very general sweeping comments saying that if another language were introduced the approach would need to be child appropriate. They admitted that they were inexperienced and therefore could not give satisfactory reasons for their choices:

“Die Methode ist ausschlaggebend” (qu. 3b-4: yes).

“Kinder sind offen zu lernen, wenn sie dabei Spaß haben und ihre Interessen berücksichtigt werden” (qu. 3b-4: yes).

“Ich habe keine Erfahrung damit” (qu. 3b-4: partly).

“Ich denke das stimmt. Ich würde gerne eine solche Einheit ansehen und auch selber daraus lernen” (qu. 3b-4: yes).

To conclude, it can be said that preschool teachers were aware of the challenges when introducing a foreign language and as a result they voiced real and genuine concerns related to this issue. Their attitudes were based largely on their familiarity with the preschool context and their experiential knowledge that they had of the children learning German. But at the time of the questionnaire survey, they could not include any other perspective that would have informed their choices, for example experiences with teaching the children English or research-based knowledge.

For the set-up of my teacher education project this meant that teachers’ attitudes would need to be re-addressed by exposing them to credible, first-hand empirical evidence that learning another foreign language actually is a rewarding and joyful experience for the children in the context of the case study. This would involve exposing them to small-scale context-related positive and credible experiences from preschool classroom contexts. It would also mean that research-based knowledge on the principles, approaches and methods of early language teaching and learning would need to be integrated – given the complete lack of theoretical background knowledge on early language learning that the preschool teachers demonstrated in the survey. Through this, participating teachers would be supported to change their attitudes as they would experience that introducing another language in their context would actually be a benefit for the children. It was the only way their partial reluctance to introduce English could be overcome.