Assessing the Language Proficiency of Tribal Heritage Language Learners: Issues and Concerns for American Indian Pueblo Languages

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 327
Author(s):  
Christine Sims
Keyword(s):  
American Indian ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Heritage Language Learners

Measuring metasyntactic ability among heritage language children

2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAPHNÉE SIMARD ◽  
VÉRONIQUE FORTIER ◽  
DENIS FOUCAMBERT
Keyword(s):  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Elementary School Children ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Language Background ◽  
French Speaking ◽  
Repetition Task

Metasyntactic Ability (MSA) refers to the conscious reflection about syntactic aspects of language and the deliberate control of these aspects (Gombert, 1992). It appears from previous studies that heritage-language learners tend to demonstrate lower MSA than their monolingual counterparts (Lesaux & Siegel, 2003). In the present study, we verified whether the same results would be obtained among Portuguese heritage children living in a French-speaking environment when their MSA is measured using two different tasks. The participants were 22 Portuguese heritage children and 22 French monolingual elementary school children (mean age = 10.9 years). Five measurement instruments were used: a reading comprehension task; a language proficiency task; two metasyntactic tasks: a replication task in which the children had to identify and reproduce an error, and a repetition task, in which they had to repeat sentences containing syntactic errors; and a sociodemographic questionnaire. The results showed that when reading comprehension and language proficiency were controlled for, no effect of language background could be observed. However, reading comprehension and language proficiency differently influenced performances on MSA tasks.

scholarly journals Assessment in Spanish heritage language programs

2020 ◽  
pp. 101-110
Author(s):  
Clara Burgo
Keyword(s):  
Language Learners ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Personal Narratives ◽  
Placement Test ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Assessment Practices ◽  
Language Programs ◽  
Language Brokers ◽  
Variation Assessment

Spanish heritage language learners (HLLs) are heterogeneous in nature. Thus, how can we assess these students? Most of the literature on this has been on placement exams (Polinsky & Kagan, 2017, among others), but the focus of this article is on assessment in Spanish heritage courses. Placement test results should be indicators of what should be included in the curriculum. One of the main challenges is the lack of the following components: specific proficiency indicators for HLLs, consensus in defining key concepts, understanding dialect variation, assessment for measuring linguistic skills, and finally research on HLLs’ assessment (Malone, Kreeft Peyton, & Kim, 2014). Thus, assessment is the biggest challenge in HL education due to the dominant monolingual ideologies, so formative assessment practices are recommended to confront them by allowing HLLs to negotiate their linguistic identities via multilingual perspectives (King, Liu, & Schwedhelm, 2018). What are specific tools or activities to negotiate these? Personal narratives of US Latinos were collected by Carreira and Beeman (2014) for the sake of reflections of HLLs as language brokers. González-Davies (2004, 2018) also mentions the importance of peer-to-peer strategies for translation competence. These projects can also become group projects, like the manifestos implemented by Moreno and MacGregor-Mendoza (2019) in a course in which language, culture, and community are the goals. All these activities are examples of the kinds of assessment that may be effective in the heritage classroom and may guide their instructors. The goal of this article is to suggest activities to connect HLLs with their communities at the same time that their learning gains are assessed in terms of language proficiency.

scholarly journals Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian Heritage Speakers in Four Major U.S. Metropolitan Areas: Resources for the Attainment of Full Professional Linguistic Proficiency

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 33
Author(s):  
Danko Šipka
Keyword(s):  
Language Learners ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Metropolitan Areas ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Heritage Learners ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Major Factors ◽  
Linguistic Proficiency ◽  
Design And Testing

The present study analyzes heritage learners of Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian (BCS) from four major U.S. metropolitan areas. The focus is on the prospects of their attaining full professional language proficiency. Several major factors in language maintenance and the possibility of attaining full professional proficiency in the language are identified. The design and testing of a syllabus for heritage language speakers is provided and discussed. The author concludes with a call for the creation of a BCS heritage language centre as a durable solution for providing heritage language learners a path toward full professional proficiency.

What does the analysis of C-test gaps tell us about the construct of a C-test? A comparison of foreign and heritage language learners’ performance

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-132
Author(s):  
Anastasia Drackert ◽  
Anna Timukova
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Language ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Scoring Method ◽  
Foreign Language Learners ◽  
Actual Use ◽  
Dichotomous Scoring ◽  
The Right

In view of the ubiquitous increase in the use of C-tests, which are almost unanimously believed to measure general language proficiency, this study investigates whether the aspects of language proficiency tapped into by the C-test format are the same when the test is taken by a learner population other than that of foreign language learners. Specifically, we conducted a differential functioning analysis and compared the types of mistakes that 113 foreign language learners of Russian made when completing C-test gaps, with the performance of 89 heritage language learners on the same C-test. The results showed that almost half of the C-test gaps are biased towards either learner group. In addition, the error analysis for a number of the biased items demonstrated that, although heritage language learners seem to have an advantage in reconstructing the meaning of C-test gaps, they fail to translate their recognition skills into producing the right form. Furthermore, the study reveals a possible sensitivity of the C-test construct to the traditionally used dichotomous scoring method. We conclude with a discussion that includes the implications of the results regarding the construct measured by the C-test and the possible consequences for its actual use.

"There is no space for being German": Portraits of Willing and Reluctant Heritage Language Learners of German

2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roswita Dressler
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Secondary Level ◽  
Significant Part ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Post Secondary ◽  
Language Identity ◽  
German Speaking ◽  
German Speaking Country

Some heritage language learners (HLLs) are comfortable identifying themselves as such, while others are decidedly reluctant to adopt this term (Piño & Piño, 2000). HLLs in this paper are defined as those students having a parent or grandparent who speaks German or those who have spent a significant part of their childhood in a German-speaking country (as suggested in Beaudrie & Ducar, 2005, p. 13). This paper highlights case studies of six HLLs of German at the post-secondary level who are participants in a motivation study (Dressler, 2008). Three students are ‘willing’ HLLs. The additional three case studies are of students that I will call ‘reluctant’ HLLs of German, and this paper explores the reasons behind their reluctance and the components of self-identification, which include language identity (Block, 2007; Pierce, 1995); language expertise; affiliation and inheritance (Leung, Harris, & Rampton, 1997); cultural artifacts (Bartlett, 2007) and positioning (Block, 2007).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document