Modern foreign languages

Increasing access to modern foreign languages to pupils with special educational needs: a neuropsychological perspective JEAN ROBERTSON

The question of access to modern foreign languages for all students continues to be a matter of debate, and sometimes dispute, between SENCOs, teachers and parents of children with SEN. Jean Robertson considers the implications of neuropsychology with regard to the student with SEN gaining access to modern foreign languages. The article looks at the task demands of second language learning and the contribution of the cerebral hemispheres to reading. Using insights from her research into the neuropsychology of dyslexia, Robertson makes a number of practical suggestions to help teachers and parents understand the issues more clearly and help students gain access to this important area of the curriculum.

Introduction The government has expressed a clear commitment to improving standards for all children (DfEE, 1997, 1998). This includes increased access to modern foreign languages (MFL), which in certain circumstances may prove problematic for pupils with special educational needs. This was one focus of a recent international conference on Multilingualism and Dyslexia (BDA, 1999). Topics included both English as a second language and the needs of students learning additional languages. The emphasis was on the specific needs of students with dyslexia yet factors such as poor short and long-term memory and impaired reading and spelling ability could be equally pertinent to the larger population of pupils with special educational needs. These pupils will in the main be educated in mainstream schools and will have full access to the National Curriculum. Such pupils may have difficulties

62

which impact on the acquisition of oral or written competence in either a first or a subsequent language. A central challenge in the climate of the movement towards full-time inclusion and within classroom support for these pupils is to make all curriculum areas accessible to all (Ainscow, Farrell, Tweddle & Malki, 1999). This article examines one way in which this may be achieved with regard to modern foreign languages.

The task demands of second language learning When the task demands of learning a second language are considered, it soon becomes apparent that the challenges presented are similar to those in acquiring a first language. The child has to first build up knowledge that phonemes (sounds) can be articulated in sequence to represent words. These may also be written as graphemes (written alphabetic symbols) which can be used to communicate via the medium of text. Success with these processes requires skill in both the auditory (heard) and the visual (seen) modality. The child needs to become familiar with the sounds and appearance of the language. These are the same tasks which have been faced in the first language, therefore knowledge of the first language (L1) may aid acquisition of the second language (L2). Factors may include the knowledge that sounds are represented by letters, which in combination form the word units that comprise the sentences, which communicate meaning. These can be communicated orally via the spoken word or via the medium of written communication. Particularly with regard to the written form, the neuropsychological implications of the task can be established. Recent scientific advances such as CT (Computerised Tomography) and MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) can clearly demonstrate the specific brain activity involved in such tasks as reading.

Support for Learning © NASEN 2000.

Vol. 15 No. 2 (2000)

The task demands of written language learning First there is a need to assimilate the physical characteristics of the letters. These may resemble the first language or may be substantively different as in the case of a person accustomed to reading English suddenly being confronted with Greek, Arabic or Chinese symbols. The first challenge is to assimilate the similarities and differences between the symbols. In English the orientation of the letters ‘b’ and ‘d’, ‘p’ and ‘q’, ‘m’ and ‘w’ and ‘n’ and ‘u’ need to be acquired. If these are not learned the words ‘bed’ or ‘man’ become indecipherable. In other languages other perceptual differences are important, for example the umlaut in German or the acute or grave accent in French. How does the child first meeting them know they are not simply marks on the paper but are an important part of the symbol? Once the knowledge of letter forms is established the order of the letters within the words is the next perceptual aspect to be significant. The model of reading acquisition proposed here is a ‘bottom-up’ process whereby knowledge of first letters and then words are gradually accumulated. Some would argue against the view and would argue that reading is a ‘top-down’ process (Goodman, 1973 in Gollasch, 1982). Teachers of students with reading difficulties recognise the common problems caused for example by the perceptually similar words ‘no’ and ‘on’ and ‘saw’ and ‘was’. This perceptual similarity also occurs in other languages; for example in Italian ‘pesche’ means ‘peaches’ whereas ‘pesce’ means ‘fish’. In the German language ‘leber’ means ‘liver’ while ‘leder’ means ‘leather’. All of these examples require careful perceptual analysis of the symbols before accurate decoding can occur. The next aspect of perceptual importance concerns the order of the words within the sentences; for example ‘He is at home’ requires a different response than ‘Is he at home?’ yet the elements within the sentences are identical. These perceptual aspects require a slow, careful response to the printed text that gains speed when the letters and words become familiar. During the course of the learning, knowledge of the sounds (phonemes) and the letters that represent them (graphemes) is gained. Response to familiar letters or sequences of letters, for example ‘cat’ and ‘house’ become automatic. At this point attention can transfer from the symbols and the sequence of the symbols to the meaning or the syntax of the communication. If words are encountered which are unfamiliar or complex, letter by letter or syllable by syllable reading can be utilised in an attempt to decode the symbols. For example, the words ‘strephosymbolia’ will be decoded differently from the word ‘dog’, or at least until it becomes a familiar part of the lexicon. In another language the Dutch word ‘inschrompelen’ (meaning shrink) requires a different kind of attention. We are conscious of the process of explicit decoding when faced with unfamiliar languages which may use the same alphabetic symbols as English yet the words may be assembled in very different ways. As knowledge of the written form of English was acquired so

Support for Learning © NASEN 2000.

Vol. 15 No. 2 (2000)

must knowledge of the written form of the new language be acquired. Again the emphasis shifts from the perceptual characteristics of the letters and the sounds they represent to the orthography or the written form of the language. As the words become familiar, there is increased use of syntax (grammar) and semantics (meaning).

Contribution of the cerebral hemispheres to reading There is now evidence that the right and left hemispheres of the brain contribute differentially to these processes. The right hemisphere of the brain is responsible for controlling the left side of the body and the left hemisphere is responsible for controlling the right side of the body. Other specific functions are also found. Generally the right hemisphere is specialist for visuo-spatial processing (Rebai, Bernard, Lannou & Jouen, 1998), for spatial awareness and for analysing the perceptual aspects of letters and words (de Graaf, 1995). In contrast, in the majority of right-handed people, the left cerebral hemisphere is responsible for language (Paulesu, Frith, Snowling, Gallagher, Morton, Frackoviak, & Frith, l996; Nicholls and Wood, 1998). Ultimately both hemispheres must work in concert when processing text. The recent advances into such techniques as CT scans and MRI studies allow the complex transfer of information from one hemisphere to the other to be demonstrated. These now confirm the earlier hypotheses of such workers as Fries (1963) who wrote of the possibility of dual hemispheric involvement in the reading process. During the process of reading one is engaged in a language activity, which activates the left hemisphere. Initially, for the novice reader during the course of reading, letter forms are perceived, which are ordered in our culture in a left to right direction. Because of this perceptual load reading also alludes to right hemisphere processing. Thus in skilful reading both hemispheres have a part to play. The Novelty Model of Goldberg and Costa (1981) would support this. This presented evidence that novel information is processed by the right hemisphere and familiar information by the left. The right hemisphere is also more suited to processing material from different modalities such as grapheme-phoneme correspondence tasks, which require use of both the visual and the auditory modalities. Studies by Rourke (1982) also support the involvement of the right hemisphere in the reading process by the initial exploration of surface features. Eventually for reasons of fluency and efficiency these functions are taken over by the left hemisphere. Ongoing research in this area reveals the involvement of both hemispheres in reading although the relative contribution may vary with the task demands (Grimshaw, 1998; Hellige, Taylor, Lesmes & Peterson; 1998). Some studies show the right hemisphere may be more effective in processing material at the letter-level rather than the word level. This could however support the neuropsychological model proposed here as letter-by-letter reading may be a feature of beginning reading.

63

The increased knowledge of the neuropsychological processes involved in reading has been utilised by some workers to extend the theoretical framework to the development of intervention techniques (Bakker, 1990). Bakker proposed the Balance model of reading which stated that reading begins in the right hemisphere and transfers to the left hemisphere when the letters and words become familiar. There is thus a developmental process whereby the acquisition of literacy (either for a first or a subsequent language) begins with greater involvement of the right hemisphere and subsequently transfers to the left hemisphere. Experimental ERP studies (event related potentials) have shown that the hemispheric shift in the primary mediation of reading takes place at about seven or eight years of age and is a feature of normal reading development (Licht et al., 1988). This theory has led to specific intervention techniques for use with dyslexic pupils (Robertson, 1999, 2000; Dryer, Beale & Lambert, 1999) although in the Netherlands it is successfully used with pupils with more general reading difficulties.

Experimental evidence on the dual hemisphere involvement Silverberg, Bentin, Gaziel, Obler & Albert, 1979 Sample

Right Visual Field

Left Visual Field

n=24 7th Grade Students

n=21 Hebrew

n=2

English

n=24 11th Grade Students

n=21 Hebrew

n=2

Hebrew

n=24 11th Grade Students

n=13 English

n=6

English

Bentin, 1981 Sample n=32 Hebrew speakers

Right Visual Field

Left Visual Field

-

New English words

Vaid, 1983 Sample

Right Visual Field

Left Visual Field Non-native unknown alphabet

Kappers and Dekker, 1995 Sample Dutch pupils

Right Visual Field

Left Visual Field

Improved single word Improved text reading (n=8) reading (n=6) Improved text reading (n=6)

Ganshow, Sparks and Javorsky, 1998 This study also found transfer of skills between German, English and Latin regardless of the phonic regularity of the language.

Figure 1 Results of experimental evidence Silverberg, Bentin, Gaziel, Obler and Albert (1979) also provide support for this initially right hemisphere involvement in the literature on foreign language acquisition. They demonstrated different brain activation patterns for foreign languages. Their studies measured the visual field preference of students when reading their first language (Hebrew) against a second language (English). Due to the

64

crossover brain/body relationship, it is possible to judge which hemisphere is involved in processing visual material. A left visual field preference (VFP) demonstrates greater involvement of the right hemisphere while a right visual field preference demonstrates greater involvement of the left hemisphere. They found that 7th Grade students showed a right visual field preference when reading Hebrew (which demonstrated involvement of the left cerebral hemisphere). However when reading English a left visual field preference was found demonstrating greater involvement of the right cerebral hemisphere. In studies of visual field preference (to demonstrate the involvement of the hemispheres in specific tasks) they found a left VFP for English words in native Hebrew speaking adolescents who had just begun to study English (demonstrating the greater involvement of the right hemisphere). This group therefore showed greater involvement of the left hemisphere for their first language yet greater involvement of the right hemisphere for the second language. VFP was then measured in a group of 11th Grade students who were more experienced in the language and a right visual field preference was found for both Hebrew and English (showing the involvement of the left hemisphere). The evidence here suggests there will be stronger right hemisphere involvement depending on the complexity of the new orthography. Similar findings were reported by Bentin in 1981, who also studied native Hebrew speakers learning English as a second language. He reported that new English words were recognised faster in the left visual field, again demonstrating increased involvement of the right hemisphere. An interesting finding from the Bentin study was that when the image was presented in a barely recognisable way, the expected right visual field preference for the first language did not occur. The degraded letter forms had apparently caused the activity to transfer to the right hemisphere. A study by Vaid in 1981 also reported increased right hemisphere involvement in processing a non-native unknown alphabet. The transfer of hemispheric activity has been confirmed by more recent studies as Illes et al. (1999) concluded that, as a second language learner became more proficient in L2, the cortical representations of the language increasingly resembled that of L1. Perani et al. (1998) also concluded this may be related to proficiency within the language. Others such as Galloway (1982) suggest this is a learning to read effect rather than a learning a second language effect. Her extensive work critically examined the findings of various studies which could contribute to an understanding of the functional organisation of the bilingual brain. The factors selected included age of acquisition, literacy effects, type of script and other language specific factors. She found that the age at which a person became bilingual may be associated with the extent to which the right hemisphere may be used to process language. Here differences were found between early bilingual (bilingual from infancy or childhood) and late bilinguals (bilingual after puberty). Galloway’s work also confirmed the greater involvement of the right hemisphere in learning to read a second language if the orthography were very different to the primary language.

Support for Learning © NASEN 2000.

Vol. 15 No. 2 (2000)

Type of script was also relevant to lateralisation as the more phonetic scripts were more left-lateralised whereas the more ideographic scripts (e.g. Chinese characters) relied more on right hemisphere processing. An interesting extension of the Galloway work was to consider the implications for teaching. She considered that certain teaching methods would appeal more to left hemisphere (LH) processing than right hemisphere (RH) processing, and this knowledge could be utilised to provide a better match between learning strategy (e.g. hemisphere preference) and teaching methods. An example of this would be that exposure to interactional communication would encourage bilateral (both hemispheres) representation of language to take place. There will be differences here between spoken and written language with the latter being more successfully acquired after greater initial involvement with the right hemisphere. Galloway emphasised the important contribution which neuropsychological evidence could make to an understanding of certain bilingual phenomena.

overhead transparencies (OHTs) should support oral language and that grapho-phonic conversion should be taught explicitly. The difficulties which pupils had in processing English phonology has been reported as affecting the learning of French phonology (Crombie, 1997). These findings have clear implications for the current trends for natural communication, which emphasises the use of language in context. In this method pupils are encouraged to engage in interactive dialogue in the second language for a specified proportion of the lesson. This may disadvantage pupils who encounter difficulties in phonological processing so may decrease their opportunities for success. These findings can also be seen to link to the neuropsychological evidence, as materials can be designed to maximise the involvement of the right cerebral hemisphere, such as prepared OHTs and perceptually stimulating wall charts providing a visual representation of the key vocabulary.

Conclusions Implications for teaching Kappers and Dekker (1995) utilised specific neuropsychological teaching methods on a sample of Dutch pupils. In this work treatment was given in either Dutch or English and the results showed differences in the two languages. In English improvements were found for both single word and passage reading, while in Dutch the improvement was in passage reading only. An interesting finding from this study was that the results were regardless of whether the intervention had been delivered in Dutch or English. The authors concluded that treatment in one language enhances reading in a second untreated language. This could have important pedagogical implications. Other workers have reported transfer of skills between languages. Ganshow, Sparks and Javorsky (1998) found a similar effect in studies in German, English and Latin and concluded that the effect did not depend heavily on the phonic regularity of the language. Their work also had implications for teaching and supports the idea of there being similar processes at work in the acquisition of both native and modern foreign languages. When they studied pupils who were experiencing failure in the acquisition of a modern foreign language they found the students had experienced similar difficulties in their native language learning. The problems could be in any or all of the aspects of language such as reading, writing, spelling or oral language. Importantly they identified one specific aspect which was more important than either motivation or intelligence, and that was auditory ability, specifically grapheme (written) phoneme (heard sound) conversion. Their studies indicated that poor foreign language learners require direct teaching to acquire the phonological, grammatical and orthographic rule systems. Results from their studies showed three principles that were associated with successful learning: multi-sensory teaching should be used wherever possible,

Support for Learning © NASEN 2000.

Vol. 15 No. 2 (2000)

The evidence therefore suggests that for new and unfamiliar material, the right hemisphere is best suited to the task. Materials should emphasise the perceptual aspects of the letters and words. This could include colours, shapes and the use of highlighter pens to make the symbols more distinct. These may lead to more pupils accessing and retaining the vocabulary of the second language so that a stronger memory trace is established. This should then lead to a speedier progression to the fluent and skilful reading of the left hemisphere. In summary the implications for teaching according to this perspective are: • Similar processes are involved in learning both first and subsequent languages. • Difficulties (for example perceptual difficulties) may be found across languages. • The right hemisphere is best suited to initial learning of both first and subsequent languages. • The perceptual aspects of letters and words should be emphasised during the course of teaching. • Grapheme-phoneme correspondence should be stressed so that pupils are taught these directly. • There should be recognition of the importance of auditory ability for success in acquiring facility in modern foreign languages. • There is a need for specific teaching in addition to language immersion approaches. • There is a need for recognition of the importance of multi-sensory teaching within an MFL context. • There should be recognition of the value of visual representation by using OHTs and wall-charts to support oral language. • There should be appreciation that the trend to natural communication may be a disadvantage for students with poor reading and spelling ability. • There should be recognition that ultimately dual hemispheric involvement is required for effective reading in either a first or a subsequent language.

65

Initially both hemispheres need to be involved in the reading process. However if the material is presented to the pupils according to a developmental model whereby initially there is a greater involvement of the right hemisphere, then the evidence suggests that the acquisition of foreign languages is likely to be successful for an increased number of students. This would benefit not only the acquisition of the second language but may also lead to improved facility with the first language. This may indicate the need for further study in this area so that the potential for improved practice is fully explored.

References AINSCOW, M., FARRELL, P., TWEDDLE, D. and MALKI, G. (1999) The role of LEAs in developing inclusive policies and practices. British Journal of Special Education, 26, 136–40. BAKKER, D. J. (1990) Neuropsychological Treatment of Dyslexia. New York: Oxford University Press. BENTIN, S. (1981) On the representation of a second language in the cerebral hemispheres of right-handed people. Neuropsychologia, 19, 599–603. BRITISH DYSLEXIA ASSOCIATION (1999) Proceedings of the First International Multilingualism and Dyslexia Conference (including teaching modern foreign languages to dyslexic students). BDA. 17-19 June. Manchester. CROMBIE, M. A. (1997) The effects of specific learning difficulties (dyslexia) on the learning of a foreign language in school. Dyslexia, 3, 27–47. DE GRAAF, M. B. (1995) Hemisphereic engagement during letter and word identification in beginning readers. Doctoral dissertation, Free University, Amsterdam. DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT (1997) Excellence for all children: Meeting Special Educational Needs. London. DfEE. DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT (1998) Meeting Special Educational Needs: A programme of action. London. DfEE. DRYER, R., BEALE, I. V. and LAMBERT, A. (1999) The Balance Model of Dyslexia and Remedial Training: An evaluative study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 2, 174–86. FRIES, C. C. (1963) Linguistics and Reading. New York. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. GALLOWAY, L. M. (1982) Bilingualism: Neuropsycholgical considerations. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 15, 12–28. GANSHOW, L., SPARKS, R. L. and JAVORSKY, J. (1998) Foreign Language Learning Difficulties: An historical perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 248–58. GOLDBERG, E. and COSTA, L. D. (1981) Hemisphere differences in the acquisition and use of descriptive systems. Brain and Language, 14, 144–73. GOODMAN, K. S. (1973) Miscues: Windows on the reading process. In Goodman, K. S. Miscue analysis: Applications to Reading Instruction ERIC reprinted in Gollasch, F. V. (ed.), 1982. GRIMSHAW, G. M. (1998) Integration and interference in the cerebral hemispheres: Relations with hemispheric specialisation. Brain and Cognition, 36, 2, 108–27. HELLIGE, J. B., TAYLOR, K. B., LESMES, L. and PETERSON, S. (1998) Relations between brain morphology and behavioural measures of hemispheric asymmetry and interhemispheric interaction. Brain and Cognition, 36, 158–92. ILLES, FRANCIS, W. S., DESMOND, J. E., GABRIELI, J. D. E., GLOVER, G. H., POLDRACK, R., LEE, C. J. and WAGNER, A. D. (1999) Convergent cortical representation of semantic processing in bilinguals. Brain and Language, 70, 347–63. KAPPERS, E. J. and DEKKER, M. (1995) Bilingual effects of unilingual neuropsycholgical treatment of dyslexic adults: A pilot study. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 1, 494–500. LICHT, R., BAKKER, D. J., KOK, A. and BOUMA, A. (1988) The development of lateral event-related potentials (ERPs) related to word naming: A four year longitudinal study. Neuropsychologia, 26, 327–40.

66

NICHOLLS, M. E. R. and WOOD, A. G. (1998) The contribution of attention to the RVF advantage for word recognition. Brain and Cognition, 36, 3, 339–57. PAULESU, E., FRITH, U., SNOWLING, M. J., GALLAGHER, A., MORTON, J., FRACKOVIAK, R. S. J. and FRITH, C. D. (1996) Is developmental dyslexia a disconnection syndrome? Evidence from PET scanning. Brain, 119, 143–57. PERANI, D., DEHAENE, S., GRASSI, F., COHEN, L., CAPPA, L., DUPOUX, E., FAZIO, F. and MEHLER, J. (1996) Brain processing of native and foreign languages. Neuroreport, 7, 2439–44. REBAI, M., BERNARD, C., LANNOU, J. and JOUEN, F. (1998) Spatial frequency and right hemisphere: an electrophysiological investigation. Brain and Cognition, 36, 21–9. ROBERTSON, J. (1999) Dyslexia and Reading: a neuropsychological approach. Whurr. London. ROBERTSON, J. (2000) Neuropsychological intervention in dyslexia: two studies on British pupils. To appear in Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 2. ROURKE, B. P. (1982) Central processing deficiencies in children: Towards a developmental neuropsychological model. Journal of Child Neuropsychology, 4, 1–18. SILVERBERG, R., BENTIN, S., GAZIEL, T., OBLER, L. K. and ALBERT, M. L. (1979) Shift of visual field preference for English words in native Hebrew speakers. Brain and Language, 8, 184–90. VAID, J. (1983) Bilingualism and brain lateralization. In S. J. Segalowitz (ed.) Language functions and brain organization. New York: Academic Press.

Correspondence Jean Robertson Institute of Education (Didsbury) Manchester Metropolitan University 799 Wilmslow Road Manchester M20 2RR

Summer School Working with Children with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties: International Perspectives on School and Classroom Practice Dates Location Fee

Language

19 - 21 July 2000 University of Liverpool, Department of Education £98 (includes refreshments, but not meals. Accommodation at a variety of rates can be arranged when booking) English

This international summer school will be led by a team who work in the field of EBD in Germany, Holland, the Czech republic and England. It will include participants from those countries. Contemporary issues in whole school and classroom practice in working with EBD will be explored from a cross-European perspective: á International comparison of whole school issues á Support systems and inter-agency work á Early intervention strategies á Approaches to classroom management á Behavioural monitoring á Therapeutic approaches á Group work practice For further details and application forms please contact: Ingrid Harper, Professional Development Secretary, Department of Education, University of Liverpool, 19 Abercromby Square, Liverpool L69 7ZG Tel: 0151 794 2513 Fax: 0151 794 2512 Email: [email protected]

Support for Learning © NASEN 2000.

Vol. 15 No. 2 (2000)