Not to understand why primary children aren't fluent in English after a year

[Claraetal]

I don't understand why primary school aged children, who arrive in reception not being able to speak English, are still considered as "English as Second Language" (ESL) for pretty much their whole time in primary school as far as I can tell. The teachers talk about them as if not being to speak, read, write English perfectly is a permanent state and I don't get it. Surely by year 1 they should be at the same level as everyone else. Let me try to explain why I am not insane... :)

I myself was moved to France with my parents as an 8 year old for a year. My parents are English and English speaking as were all of my friends before I moved. I was sent to an entirely French school at the start of the school year. It was a little tough but by Christmas I could speak French and some time between then and the end of the school year I was pretty much indistinguishable from the other kids.

As another and maybe better example, I spent some time in Denmark this year. There I spoke to English speaking families whose primary school aged kids had been sent to normal Danish language schools. They said the same thing. That is that after 6 months or so their children were pretty much fluent and after a year they couldn't really be told apart from their class mates. In these cases their parents couldn't speak a word of Danish on arrival and were still pretty terrible after a year.

I get it if the class or school doesn't have English as the majority language. In that case you are lacking the total immersion effect. But I am talking about our local schools where English is the only language commonly heard in the playground. I don't buy the story that it is because their parents don't speak English or that they don't speak English at home as that was exactly the same for me with French and also for all the ex-pat families in Denmark.

So what is going on?

@user1499173618 A much more interesting subject, IMO, is why IQ levels are falling and what should be done about it I was just thinking that too.

@bringonthescience sounds like you did a fabulous job!

@steppemum yes that is exactly what we found, learning French in France, both for adults and the dc. The better the awareness of first language grammar the easier it is to learn second language grammar. Someone with a good vocab will be searching for the French equivalent of the words in order to express themselves as they do in English.

@bottleofjameson in France I can read French books with dc, do homework with them, learn vocab with them, but in terms of expanding fluency in conversation I would leave that the French!

The German government had an advisory leaflet saying that parents should speak in the language they were fluent in with their children. Usually, if children go to playschool, and have friends or even family who speak the local language with them, then the parents will be fine speaking their own language at home and bringing up bilinguals. Usually, it's the majority language that becomes strongest over time.

I meet parents all the time who have been advised by HVs to only speak English at home

I don't agree either.

I had my DS in the UK and decided to keep speaking Portuguese at home. I knew he'd pick up English very quickly and encouraged it anyway, with books, getting out and about with him and tv programmes. I didn't want him to struggle with his Portuguese family and I consider knowing languages an advantage.
When he went to nursery, he understood English but didn't speak it normally. However, he was able to adapt quickly.

Eventually we did return to Portugal, and he adapted really well, even though at the start he'd speak to other children in English, but not within the family. It was kind of funny.

This applies exactly identically to me in France, the kids in Denmark and the (newly introduced) English language families sending their children to Welsh language schools. In short, I don't really buy it, well maybe a little bit.

But it's not just about your experience - that isn't universal. Just because you coped doesn't mean that every child will do the same without extra help. Language isn't just about communicating with your peers, it's about your overall literacy and understanding in school. For many children, not having English as a first language will be a barrier to their overall abilities even if they can communicate with their peers. Some of them will, of course, manage fine without help. But not all of them will. And it's really important that additional resources are provided to level that playing field.

It depends on the kids, and possibly also the language. My girls have been in Kindergarten in Germany for three years and while they speak a lot of German it's very clear when you listen to them that they're not native speakers - they make grammar mistakes that the native kids grew out of a year or two ago.

I think it's a really good thing that schools are made aware if a kid is ESL, because they can need additional help, but it's not the same sort of help as a native speaking kid whose language is at the same level IYSWIM. Here in Germany they're a bit blinkered about this stuff, at least officially - they make all the kids go through the same school readiness test and there's a large bit of grammar stuff that they mark on the same curve for bilingual and native German speaking kids. So what happens is that all the kids who get marked below a certain level get referred to an educational psychologist to make the final decision about school readiness and the woman basically these days spends her day trying to spot the one kid with a learning disability in among all the kids who're bilingual. It seems like an inefficient way of doing things, specially in our area where I'd estimate that about 10% of the kids don't speak German at home.

toomuch She's not just looking for learning disabilities; if it's just that their German is not up to scratch yet, they suggest another year in Kindergarten to prepare them for school. But in the end it's the parents' choice anyway.

There were many people working there whose first language wasn’t English, they all said they only thought in their native tongue.

I speak English fluently, and Dutch, Russian at a high conversational level, and Indonesian and French and BSL at a low conversational level.

When I am i a context of the other language, even those which I don't speak well, I do not think in English. You cannot effectively speak another language if you are thinking and translating in your head.

And it is complete nonsense to say a adult can never get to native speaker level. There are many who do, including my dh who is Dutch, but whose English is now probably better than his Dutch.

As a pp said monolingualism is not the world's norm. Human beings are designed to be multilingual and multilingual fluency is the very common

Someone upthread asked about the research, I believe it was done in UK on ESL kids, looking at how long it took to assimilate and whether they ever achieved 100% native speaker level.

It is also worth pointing out though, that a child who had just moved half way round the world, due to eg conflict is probably not going to learn as quickly or as effectively as a child who is not trying to process trauma and transition. Maybe some help for immigrant kids who are struggling to process their experiences might help in their long term language and adjustment

When I am i a context of the other language, even those which I don't speak well, I do not think in English. You cannot effectively speak another language if you are thinking and translating in your head.
You don't do it, because you have a knack for languages :) Some people never learn to stop translating, though, especially if they are only abroad a short time, or not at all.

If you ask a group of engineers who've been abroad for a year or two what language they think in, you'll get a different answer than if you ask a group of linguists or people who have lived abroad for decades.

I moved to France as a child with my mum and went to a French primary school from half way through CP (first year of primary) to the end of CM1 (year 5?). By the end of the of my third term there I was in the top 5 of the class and was for the remaining time I spent in France. We had school reports which told you your position in the class. I don't know about at first but certainly now I do not have an English accent when speaking French even though I have barely spoken it in 20 years. There was another kid in my class who had been in France longer but really struggled and ended up being held back a year at the point that I was leaving. In the first year we both had additional French classes together but his French didn't improve past the playground level. I only needed these for the first year. I know his mum couldn't speak or understand any French and I think that had a huge impact. My mum could read with me, had French friends, I was encouraged to watch French tv, went to a French childminders, extra curricular activities etc. The other child did none of this as his mum couldn't/wouldn't learn the language at all. I think that makes a huge difference if you don't have any extra support outside of school.

So, if you want to improve a child's English, stopping them from speaking their mother tongue at home in order to insist they speak English at home, is not going to help. Support their mother tongue, and at the same time support their English learning through school is the way to go.

Absolutely! I can see why people think it would be better for children to only have exposure to one language, but ultimately it's likely to benefit them more for the parents to use the language they feel most comfortable in, in order that the child develops a rich and complex vocabulary in that language. Plus, they gain a good understanding of that minority language as well. A short term deficiency in the community language is not so much of a handicap when contrasted with this enormous benefit - but it is very helpful to have support with this in schools, which is why it does benefit ESL children to be "labelled" as ESL and have access to ESL support in schools, even when they can get along perfectly fine in English.

Nobody (in England) seems to have a problem with this when it's presented the other way around - I would be totally useless to my son at supporting his German because his German already so far surpasses mine. Of course I help as best I can with his homework. But mostly I see it as much more valuable to support his English instead meaning that later on when he studies English (or even if he never did) he will be at a huge advantage in that area. Later in life being able to communicate equally well in English or German will be an advantage for him. So I don't see it as a huge concern that he will find school a little more difficult than his peers, and this is not something I can do a massive amount about anyway. Of course, if he can access extra support at school to help bring him up to the level of German children, that would be wonderful, and a huge help to him.

It's exactly the same when the community language is English and the home language is Urdu or whatever. It doesn't disadvantage children in the big picture to speak another language at home. But they may require more support at school to keep up with native peers, or more understanding that they don't have the same access to English support at home. Support at school would of course be the most beneficial for the ESL child. Whether that is the best use of school resources is a whole different discussion.

As for the idea that nobody can understand a foreign language as well as their native tongue - if you grow up bilingual, there is no such distinction. Plus, you only understand your native language well in the small area that you grow up. If a Brit moves to the US or vice versa, all kinds of misunderstandings crop up because being a native speaker vs an accomplished learned speaker is really about the small things, slang, idioms, context, culture - and in fact, if you learn by immersion in a culture, you'll pick these things up anyway.

We had a few naysayers telling us that we were damaging our children by speaking English at home :) Daughter is at uni now, son just passed his Abitur. Both very balanced bilinguals and enjoying all the benefits and kudos that brings :) Others growing up with two languages have done just as well as their peers, i.e. some also at uni, some hated school and dropped out early. The differences are a lot more to do with social status, wealth, parents' education, children's character.

MissEliza I supported ESL pupils for five years and I can tell you few children attain the level of a native speaker even after seven years of primary.

I find this amazing. Do you think this is typical of children who have total language immersion (except for home) in English or were these children at schools where English wasn't the main or only language spoken in the playground?

OP I have lived in the Uk for 27 years thats 7 longer than I lived in my birth country.. English is still my 2nd language.. I am bilingual. I likely now speak English better than my mother tongue bit it is still and always will be my 2nd language because it is not.. my mother tongue. So I will always have ESL

Additionally I would like to know when this was in Denmark as my dd spend 6 months there about 10 years ago living with my sister and after that time she was still no where near fluent in the language as all the Danes were so competent in English she really did not have a great need to learn Danish. DD at the time was 8 years old.

“I myself was”...
From the OP. Oh the irony. Darling don’t lecture the great unwashed about your sacred mother tongue when you have a tenuous grasp of it yourself.

I've taught children who have English as their second (or third) language and absolutely agree that it is the vocab that they often struggle with, particularly later on. It's easier to perceive a child as having a really good level of English if they are in Reception/KS1, but as they get older they are expected (as are the native English speakers) to have a much wider vocabulary and comprehension of the subtleties of the language.

For example, a five year old may describe something as 'wet'. An older child would be expected to understand and use more subtle variations of this, such as 'damp', 'moist', 'soaked', 'sodden', 'slick', 'humid', 'clammy', 'watery', 'dewy', 'saturated, 'hydrated', 'dank', 'aqueous' - you get the idea. They could say 'red' - or they could say 'maroon', 'burgundy', scarlet', 'vermilion', 'crimson' etc. A native English speaker will have been exposed to far more of these terms, and will be far more likely to understand the subtle differences between them and in which context they should be used. Their reading comprehension will be lower due to this, which will then affect almost all of the subjects they are studying.

DS2 is in Y1 and 40% of his class are ESL. This fits with the general percentage in his school overall. However, the school achieves excellent results and generally scores SATS results which are top or second in the area. I certainly don't feel that DS is missing out educationally because of the high number of ESL pupils in his class

I imagine a lot of that is due to the school having very practised methods for teaching ESL children - they are very experienced and spend a lot more money on this area than most of the primary schools that I've taught in. Also, many of the parents are already fluent English speakers who work at the local hospital or universities - they probably have a higher level of academic English than many native speakers. They often, though not always, have the money to pay for additional tuition outside of school. They ensure that their DC have English books at home, watch English TV and read English newspapers and make sure their children are enrolled in lots of groups/activities with native speaking children. The children who don't speak any English except when at school (maybe their parents don't speak fluently, they can't afford tutors, they only socialise within their own communities and watch TV in their first language) find it noticeably harder as they get older, ime. They often end up not speaking either language to a high academic level.

I was thinking about this only the other day actually, because DS had his friend over for tea. His friend started Reception mid year, so about 18m ago) and he spoke no English at all. Listening to him chattering away to DS, I was marvelling at how he's become socially fluent. He can chat away about school, games they were playing - you'd not necessarily know he couldn't speak a word only last year. But he is far behind DS in his reading, maths, everything really, despite being obviously bright. His brain has had to learn the language first, so it has missed out on picking other things up. Still incredible how fast children can pick up so much!

Why is her totally idiomatic use of "myself" ironic? She's saying her French is good, not her English :)

If a Brit moves to the US or vice versa, all kinds of misunderstandings crop up because being a native speaker vs an accomplished learned speaker is really about the small things, slang, idioms, context, culture - and in fact, if you learn by immersion in a culture, you'll pick these things up anyway.

Agreed - this made me think of that poor nanny Louise Woodward, who was crucified in a US court for saying she 'popped the baby on the bed' during her murder trial. The American lawyers seemed to have no idea what this expression meant and made out that she was admitting to having thrown the baby violently, or slamming him down onto the bed!

Enko OP I have lived in the Uk for 27 years thats 7 longer than I lived in my birth country.. English is still my 2nd language.

I think that it is very different moving at 20 and 5. You learn languages quite differently as a small child and also the total immersion is.. well.. more total.

You are right that after 6 months the children were not full fluent in Denmark, although the ones I met were certainly "playground fluent". But after 12 months I was told they weren't held back at all academically compared to their peers.

Eek! Judging by what I've seen on US forums "pop" in relation to children is actually most often used as a euphemism for "spank" or "hit" so I can see how that might not have gone down well at all.

@Racecardriver I'm glad that worked for you but I'm guessing your parents had good English.

I taught a lady the other day who had stopped speaking Ukranian to her primary aged children and they had forgotten it. Her English was very, very weak. She basically had no common language with her children and was unable to communicate with them effectively. So sad.

I guess I'm just coming from the perspective that if I could have given my children two languages, I would have. It's such an advantage in life.

Not particularly. My father reverted to Russian when my English reached an acceptable standard. They were educated people but learned English very late in life so couldn't adequately express themselves in E flush.

About ESL, what is it that makes a child ESL?
My dcs are bilingual. They’ve been raised in French, their French was 100% better than their English when they started school. But they are not considered ESL because they were born in the U.K. (and nor were they given any support on that area either).
A friend of mine went to the US as a child and stayed there until he was 12yo. By that time, he was NEVER speaking a word of French with his parents (both French), his French wasn’t great at all but his english was perfect. Now as an adult, he still says he is somehow ‘lacking’ (esp with spelling) despite working as a university lecturer in a humanity subject. Should he have been treated as French as a second language despite his parents being French???
The opposite situation can be easily imagined.

Re the studies done in the UK showing that children with ESL are not doing as well, I am wondering if the results would be different in a different country.
Aka is there a biais in the U.K. that is preventing ESL Children to do as well as their counterparts, just like it seems to stop girls to do well in maths (even though girls do as well and cited better than boys in other countries).

I have some experience in the topic (though not as much as some in this thread) and I have a couple of points.

1 you are completely discounting the cultural flexibility it takes to learn a foreign language and what becoming a 'foreigner' in your own family can mean

2 it seems to me that this is the least helpful arena in which to say anyone 'should' be doing something by any age /within any particular timescale. You cannot empty a language into someone's head. That is well documented. There are all sorts of learner/social/teacher/personal history related factors.

There's a huge difference when a different language is spoken at home. DS can happily play and chat with his friends that speak Polish, Russian, Japanese and Spanish at home. But when we all go home, DS and I have a conversation in English about, for example, why modern computer games require the computer to have more memory, how engines work, who killed Lord Darnley and why. His friends go home and have similar conversations with their families in another language so they will each tend to have more advanced vocabulary and fluency in the language they speak at home. The children themselves may not really be aware of the difference, seeing as they are primarily concerned with lego and Beyblades.