Additive‐Bilingual (Immersion) Education: Cognitive and Language Development *

Abstract

The superior control of cognitive processing demonstrated by children in the early stages of additive bilingualism may enhance symbolic reasoning abilities. The developmental interdependence of LI and L2 may allow additive‐bilingual children to maintain normal native‐language development. This study examined the development of a Grade 2 additive‐bilingual (Spanish‐immersion) program class as compared to a monolingual classroom on measures of nonverbal problem‐solving and native‐language development. Theprogramwas the independent variable in two comparisons. In the first comparison, nonverbal problem‐solving was the dependent variable, as measured by Raven's (1977) Coloured Progressive Matrices (CPM). As hypoth‐esized, a repeated measures ANCOVA of the results of fall and spring administrations of the CPM indicated significant differences in favor of the Spanish‐immersion group, F(1, 35)=5.85, p=.O2. In the second comparison, native‐language development was the dependent variable as measured by the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test‐R (PPVT‐R). A parametric independent

First and Second Language Acquisition in German Children Attending a Kindergarten Immersion Program: A Combined Longitudinal and Cross‐Sectional Study

“…After controlling for cognitive abilities and SES, English vocabulary was found to increase significantly from Grade 1 to Grade 4 in both immersion students and students with conventional English instruction, though immersion students outperformed conventionally educated children. Concerning L1 development, majority-language immersion students have been shown to develop comparable or even higher L1 competencies compared to monolingually educated students (e.g., Bamford & Mizokawa, 1991;Cheng, Li, Kirby, Qiang, & Wade-Woolley, 2010;Harley, Hart, & Lapkin, 1986;Swain & Lapkin, 1982). The fact that L1 development is unimpaired by immersion is presumably due to students' daily contact with their L1 outside school (e.g., at home, through media, and in the community), which provides sufficient L1 input for age-appropriate L1 development.…”

The Effects of CLIL Education on the Subject Matter (Mathematics) and the Target Language (English)

“…That is to say, student who starts learning a subject matter in a foreign language early score better results than older ones. In general, CLIL leads learners to be more cognitively active (Bialystok, Craik, & Freedman, 2006;Bamford and Mizokawa, 1991).…”

Language Learning and Its Impact on the Brain: Connecting Language Learning with the Mind Through Content‐Based Instruction

“…For example, research has shown that children who have studied a foreign language during their elementary school experience, integrating language study across the curriculum, achieve expected gains and receive even higher scores on standardized tests in reading, English language arts, science, mathematics, social studies and geography, as well as show greater cognitive development in such areas as mental fl exibility, creativity at solving complex problems, divergent thinking, and higher order thinking skills, when compared to monolingual children (Armstrong & Rogers, 1997;Bamford & Mizokawa, 1991;Genesee, 1979;Genesee, Holobow, Lambert, & Chartrand, 1989;Kennedy, 1998;McCaig, 1988;Rafferty, 1986;Swain, 1984). In addition, research has shown a difference of more than 250 points in average composite SAT scores (a set of standardized college entrance examinations used in the United States that assess student reasoning based on knowledge and skills developed by the student in past school coursework) between students that had no experiences studying foreign language and those who had fi ve or more years (Cooper, 1987).…”