Comparative Context Analysis: Young Heritage Language Tutoring and Spanish Study Abroad in Mexico

By: Anna Krinitsyna

INTRODUCTION

The United States is not a monolingual country, but there have been some monolingual policies that have led to destruction of communities and lives. For example, the No Child Left Behind Act attempted to make the instruction of indigenous languages almost illegal (McCarty, 2013, p. 192) and a bill in Arizona threatened to fire teachers who spoke with a hispanic accent (p. 193). Multilingualism, on the other hand, is beneficial for equality, richness in culture, cognitive development, business relations, and much more (Cui & Cui, 2015, p. 889). Today there are various contexts in which multilingualism is maintained - language revitalization, foreign language study, immersion schools, study abroad, heritage language learning, and more. 

In this paper, I will compare young heritage language instruction to a Spanish study abroad context. There are various definitions of the term “heritage language learner”. According to Valdés and as quoted by Russell and Kurscak (2015), a heritage language learner (HLL) in the United States is “a student who is raised in a home where a non-English language is spoken, who speaks or merely understands the heritage language and who is to some degree bilingual in English and the heritage language” (p. 414). The language is often not taught at school and not used in stores, banks, etc. 

While some parents in the U.S. do not have the goal of maintaining their heritage language (HL), others do. To do this, some seek bilingual immersion schools for their children with instruction in the HL, others find community after-school programs, and others yet decide to be the ones to teach their child and have a “heritage-language-only” policy in the home. This paper explores another method: hiring a tutor. Individualized language tutoring can be a way for parents to find support and motivation to pass on the HL to their child, especially when there is not a community nearby that speaks the language (Krinitsyna, 2022). 

Heritage learners are a diverse group - some might not understand their language while others might be able to speak it but read or understand the grammar. Parents also have different levels of commitment and time for supporting their children. There are parents who hire a tutor while also enrolling their child in a heritage community school. While some do it to supplement home and/or school instruction with a variety of input, others find that many community schools are inadequate in methodology and teacher training (Douglas, 2005).

The study abroad (SA) context is generally more well-known than HL learning. I am exploring American adult students studying Spanish in Mexico, which is more of a “foreign language” type of language study. While it is true that some students might be Spanish heritage speakers, many are not. There are different reasons students might be studying in Mexico, which will be explored later. Students might know more than two languages, but most students have already learned some Spanish. Study abroad programs can be as short as 4 weeks long, or long-term, lasting an academic year.

I chose to compare these contexts because they are very different. Thus, it seems easiest to start with differences between these contexts. There are differences in the ages of students - children vs adults. One is a heritage language context, the other is a foreign language. There are also differences in class sizes - the first context is one-on-one learning and the second involves a class of at least 6 students. Reasons and purposes for studying the language are also different. Naturally, types of activities will be different, as well as topics covered. While most HLL meet with a tutor for an hour once or twice a week, study abroad students have classes at least 3 times a week, several hours a day.

I hypothesize that similarities will be in teacher characteristics and cultural instruction. Both HL and study abroad programs try to help students learn the culture of speakers of that language. Another similarity that I feel exists is "fill-in-the-gap" instruction. Students already know some parts of the language but have not yet discovered or mastered other parts, so instruction might not always be linear, but rather targeted to the needs of the learners.

AFFORDANCES

Young heritage language tutoring. Advocates for multilingualism note how quickly children’s home languages are lost when there is little support (Ro & Cheatham, 2009, p. 290). 

Thus, parents in the U.S. see tutoring as a tool to battle monolingualism, overcome cultural barriers, and keep multilingualism alive (Cui & Cui, 2015, p. 889). One of the greatest benefits for young HLL to study their language is to nurture cultural identity and social-emotional connections with family members. HL tutoring is a way to bridge American-born children, who are switching to English, with non-English speaking relatives who either reside in the U.S. or visit from the home country. In one study, “by consistently bridging established concepts with corresponding ideas of a different culture, the tutors carried the objective of creating a comfortable environment to demonstrate the interconnectedness of global cultures (p. 892).

Some parents do not have the time to teach their child literacy in the heritage language (Ro & Cheatham, 2009, p. 299). Furthermore, parents are often not as equipped to teach their children, so if they are the only language input, their children might develop less proficiency than with formal instruction. Tutoring offers pedagogically-sound instruction for busy parents. 

Another advantage of young HL tutoring is that students often make substantial progress in reading (p. 300). Tutors can use children’s inquisitiveness in individualized instruction “to illustrate that languages borrow words from each other and in some instances, keep the original pronunciation” (Cui & Cui, 2015, p. 890).

Lastly, instruction is often in the student’s home, either in-person or online. In this case, younger siblings can be present in the room. Witnessing the experiences of their older siblings can help younger siblings become interested in learning their HL. 

Spanish study abroad in Mexico. It is generally understood that studying abroad is better for language proficiency development than studying at home because it provides opportunities for informal contact with the language that might not have been readily available in the United States. This is true - many studies have noted most improvement is in listening and pronunciation skills. In one study, conducted by Félix-Brasdefer, & Hasler-Barker, SA students showed improvements in pragmalinguistic ability of complimenting others, while non-study abroad students did not (p. 81). This is a major benefit of SA. Students hear more linguistic variety that they do not hear at home. For example, an SA context has the ability to influence students’ dialectal use of adjectives, and leads to more varieties of use of adjectives in general (p. 83). Thus, we can conclude that the SA context helps students gain pragmatic proficiency that they might not have gained without it. However, some studies have found that length of residence, proficiency level, intensity of interaction, and individual variation are variables that can prove or disprove this perception (Félix-Brasdefer, & Hasler-Barker, 2015, p. 77).

Another affordance of study abroad is program organization - students take an entrance test to be placed in the right course based on proficiency level. They are also allowed to switch to a different level in the first week or so if they or their instructor find that the level they were placed in was not the best. Lastly, but very importantly, students can conduct conversation analysis out “in the field” to learn the language from how locals interact, instead of using textbooks. This type of inductive reasoning not only interests students on a greater level than deductive learning, it allows for learning of actual language use, instead of “textbook” language that might be outdated or not in touch with reality. 

CONSTRAINTS

Young heritage language tutoring. One of the first drawbacks of individualized tutoring is the cost - not everyone is able to afford this type of instruction. This means that certain students will have more opportunities to learn, while others will be disadvantaged due to their economic situation. 

Second, one or two hours a week is not enough instruction without other language support. Tutoring cannot replace speaking the language at home, since what is most important for heritage language development is the regular use of the language in the home. Thus, if parents are not invested in using the language in the home, they cannot expect their child to have advanced proficiency.

Lastly, not all tutors provide high-quality instruction. Just like community heritage programs, some tutors do not use research-based teaching and learning methods. Similarly, while speaking and listening skills are usually developed as a result of tutoring, many programs focus only on reading and writing. This is one of the constraints of tutoring - because parents are paying out of pocket, they want to maximize results in a shorter period of time. Most parents and tutors feel that the best use of time is for tutors to focus on reading and writing, since parents feel less apt in instructing those skills.

Spanish study abroad in Mexico. There are several drawbacks of SA programs. For U.S. students, short-term SA programs are popular, usually lasting 4-8 weeks. This is often not enough for significant language improvement if it is to be compared to at-home study. In a study by Félix-Brasdefer, & Hasler-Barker (2015), when students were tested four months later, it was discovered that their level of retention was lower than the researchers expected. Some students somewhat reverted back to the way they spoke prior to the SA experience (p. 83). Interestingly, they noticed that there was learner variation - there was a small percentage of students whose productive skills of complimenting continued to improve after the end of their SA time.

LEARNER MOTIVATIONS & OUTCOMES

Young heritage language tutoring. Most children willingly participate in lessons with a tutor and readily complete reading and writing activities with them, even when they might not be as motivated to use the language outside of the lessons (Ro & Cheatham, 2009, p. 300). At the same time, students often decide that English is easier to read and write than their heritage language, leading them to lose motivation (p. 302). Furthermore, there is little motivation to learn their HL when it is not used, acknowledged, and/or valued outside of the home. It becomes even less motivating when the student does not interact with other bilingual children. Children are not able to understand the value of multilingualism until they become older. In adulthood, many regret that they did not retain their language and start to learn it again (Dufour, 2022, p. 3). 

Lessons with an adult might not be motivating enough for children. Having other children, like siblings and peers to practice the language with is important. According to Ro and Cheatham, “it takes an entire community to demonstrate the value of bilingualism to children for them to be intrinsically motivated and recognize the purposes to pursue more than one language” (p. 303). Tutors “can share resources with parents on where and/or how to find peers for their children, but most parents already have these connections because HLLs in the U.S. are many times a part of close-knit communities” (Krinitsyna, 2022).

Spanish study abroad in Mexico. Similarly, in the SA context, “students’ attitudes toward the TL and culture, as well as their language learning expectations, may affect their language contact and how they benefit linguistically from that contact” (Yager, 1998, p. 898). The intensity of students’ interactions has a greater effect on language development than length of stay, and that also determines how much they are able to maintain upon returning home. Kent Yager concludes that students who enjoy practicing Spanish pronunciation tend to make greater gains in pronunciation than those who do not enjoy it (p. 908). 

Some differences between cultures, especially those related to perceptions of appropriate and safe interactions can intimidate students, resulting in less interaction. Even if people mean no harm, students might be less motivated to leave their host family’s home if they feel uncomfortable, which means they will have less opportunity for language development.

APPROPRIATE APPROACHES TO TEACHING AND LEARNING

Young heritage language tutoring. As noted earlier in the paper, tutors can take advantage of childrens’ curiosity and the freedom of individualized instruction to bridge the languages students speak. Research on translanguaging and multi-competence has shown that using more than one language in discourse “offers the language support to differentiate and adapt instruction to make content comprehensible…It activates prior knowledge and builds background that leads to success…[It] can serve to deepen student understanding and allows for the expansion of new knowledge, enhances critical thinking skills, and promotes metalinguistic awareness” (Marrero-Colón, 2021, p. 13). All teachers in schools, not just HL tutors, need to demonstrate the value of bilingualism and multiculturalism.

Spanish study abroad in Mexico. In most SA contexts, students are required to speak Spanish in formal and informal settings, live with a host family, and participate in social events (conversation clubs, sports clubs, field trips, conferences, theaters, etc.). Furthermore, explicit and implicit classroom instruction on pragmatic awareness prior to and during SA is recommended to maximize spoken proficiency (Félix-Brasdefer, & Hasler-Barker, 2015, p. 83). “Without specific focus on both pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic information and exposure to relevant pragmatic input, learners are not prepared to approach appropriate interactions with [native speakers] in the target language context” (p. 84). Acknowledging and teaching dialectal varieties is important, as students will come in contact with various dialects. They might already come to the program having learned from teachers who speak different dialects of Spanish. 

Kent Yager (1998) also suggests for program directors and teachers to assign students to interview local people about their history, traditions, legends, food, jokes, and so on (p. 909). Results of studies suggest that when students, especially beginners, spend more time on interaction with local residents, their speaking abilities, like pronunciation improve more, whereas when they spend more time on non-interactive tasks, like reading, watching television, or listening to music, they make more improvements on grammatical knowledge (p. 907). This may be because when students spend more time on non-interactive activities, they probably spend less time practicing oral skills. 

RELEVANT SOCIAL, POLITICAL, OR SOCIAL FACTORS

Young heritage language tutoring. Though it is rare, some immigrants return to their home country, so it is important for the parents that their children learn the language. As mentioned earlier in the paper, most parents see tutoring as a tool to battle monolingualism, overcome cultural barriers, and keep multilingualism alive (Cui & Cui, 2015, p. 889). Tutors can create comfortable environments for their students to bridge ideas from different cultures. 

Spanish study abroad in Mexico. According to Menard-Warwick & Palmer (2012), one purpose of study-abroad in Mexico for pre-service teachers from the U.S. “is to bring them together in dialogue with people they would not otherwise encounter [...and…] help students contextualize the challenges parents can face in supporting their children in school” (p. 135). SA organizers can arrange for future teachers to meet people who might be immigrants in the U.S and who they might be serving in school. This can help teachers be less judgemental about what it means to be a supportive parent for their child’s education. However, only visiting and reflecting on the trip is not enough for critical analysis to happen. The authors of this article argue that “in-depth preparation beforehand and ample time for structured reflection afterwards” (p. 136) is essential. This should be done through scaffolded dialogue using multimodal reflection. Finally, even though future teachers should experience the challenges of writing in an L2, using their L1 for emotional processing is important for meeting learning objectives of sociopolitical awareness. 

CONCLUSION

Even though this paper compared affordances, constraints, learner motivation, teaching approaches, and socio-political factors, it did not cover the full scope of the contexts. A deeper look at each context will most likely uncover many more important points. Still, it is evident that heritage language and study abroad contexts are not homogenous - there is variety in learner characteristics, proficiency and socio-political factors in each one. Even though my study went in a different direction than I mentioned in my hypothesis, part of it turned out to be true. What is important is that both contexts value multilingualism. Students do not necessarily come out of these contexts with advanced proficiency in all of their languages, but that is not the goal, and not even a reality. The value of multilingualism is in functional and communicative competence, as well as self and cultural expression.

In my own teaching, I would like to include more socio-cultural studies. Even though I use translanguaging in instruction and make a point to acknowledge every language and dialect my students come into contact with, I would like to move away from a focus on communication and literacy to an inclusion of pragmatics and culture. In my context, students are very young, so I have not yet figured out a good plan for this change. Most of the resources available are for adult instruction. In my research for this paper, I came across a site for children created by a university that I think will be helpful for me in this area. I also think that incorporating parents into cultural and pragmatic inquiry will be important. In my work and studies, I have found that including students and, if relevant, their parents is one of the best ideas for creating appropriate language-learning experiences. My research for this paper has supported my thoughts, but also given me many other guiding principles in language instruction. 

REFERENCES

Cui,  Q. & Cui, T. (2015). Multilingualism Alive. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(5), 889–893. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0505.01  

Douglas, M. O. (2005). Pedagogical theories and approaches to teach young learners of Japanese as a heritage language. Heritage Language Journal, 1, 60–82. https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.3.1.3  

Dufour, M. (2022). Primary Data Collection Report. Retrieved from class assignment for LT534: Language Learning in Context. University of Oregon.

Félix-Brasdefer, J. C., & Hasler-Barker, M. (2015). Complimenting in Spanish in a short-term study abroad context. System (Linköping), 48, 75–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.09.006  

Krinitsyna, A. (2022). Primary Data Collection and Report. Retrieved from class assignment for LT534: Language Learning in Context. University of Oregon.

Marrero-Colón, M.B. (2021). CAL commentary: Translanguaging: Theory, concept, practice, stance… or all of the above? Center for Applied Linguistics.  https://www.cal.org/resource-center/publications-products/translanguaging   

McCarty, T. (2013). Language planning and policy in Native America: History, theory, praxis. In Multilingual Matters (Vol. 90). Multilingual Matters.

Menard-Warwick, J., & Palmer, D. (2012). Eight versions of the visit to La Barranca: Critical discourse analysis of a study-abroad narrative from Mexico. Teacher Education Quarterly (Claremont, Calif.), 39(1), 121–138. https://www-jstor-org.libproxy.uoregon.edu/stable/pdf/23479565.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A2f5f42cc46e9aafe9ee084497235ef1a&ab_segments=&origin=&acceptTC=1  

Ro, Y. E. & Cheatham, G. A. (2009). Biliteracy and bilingual development in a second-generation Korean child: A case study. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 23(3), 290–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568540909594662  

Russell, B. D., & Kuriscak, L. M. (2015). High school Spanish teachers’ attitudes and practices toward Spanish heritage language learners. Foreign Language Annals, 48(3), 413–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12145 

Yager, K. (1998). Learning Spanish in Mexico: The effect of informal contact and student attitudes on language gain. Hispania, 81(4), 898–913. https://doi.org/10.2307/345798