Exploring how linguistic characteristics affect reading skill development and moderate cross-linguistic skills transfer in multilingual contexts

• In Event: Language of instruction transitions: factors that predict multilingual literacy acquisition and cross-linguistic skills transfer from four countries

Proposal

Research suggests that the orthographic and linguistic properties of languages significantly affect literacy acquisition. The nature of how different orthographies encode symbols to their respective sounds is different across languages, and this has significant bearing on the timing and sequencing of how reading is taught across languages (Verhoeven & Perfetti, 2019; Nag, 2007). The main facets of orthographic differences include orthographic depth, orthographic breadth, phonological unit size and structure, and visual complexity (Chang & Perfetti, 2018; Share, 2014; Verhoeven & Perfetti, 2019). For example, a study of orthographic complexity in Uganda revealed that language characteristics have a large impact on reading outcomes (Brunette et al., 2019).


Bilingual models also underscore the importance of linguistic and orthographic properties of each language being acquired and help explain multiliteracy outcomes (Koda, 2008; Chung et al., 2018). Several studies have shown that L1 reading ability is one of the most significant predictors of L2 reading, known as “transfer” of L1 reading skills to L2 reading skills (August & Shanahan, 2006; Koda & Reddy, 2008). Transfer theories also posit that L1 and L2 relationships are significantly impacted by the linguistic and orthographic distance between the languages being learned. But too little research has been conducted across contexts and languages to understand how these patterns work in LMICs and should inform policy.


We use a quantitative, multi-case research design and cross-sectional sample of 1,200 students per country in 60 schools in a random, stratified sample. In each country (with the exception of Rwanda, which has a predominantly monolingual local language population), we selected two regions with distinct local languages, sampling 30 schools in each region, to test the transfer relationships. Each student was tested in two languages, a local LOI (L1 or LOI1) and a second language (L2 or LOI2) to which students are expected to transition. We sought to include local L1s with different orthographic properties to allow variation in the sample and in the relationships between L1s and L2s. The sample also includes 3 different L2s (English, French, and Portuguese), offering significant variation in language pairs and orthographic properties across languages.


We will utilize moderation analysis to examine how the phonological proximity and orthographic proximity between different L1s and L2s moderate the relationships between L1 and L2 decoding.

Findings from this analysis may have significant implications for curriculum design, including issues such as the time it takes to acquire certain skills in certain languages and the degree and strength of transfer relationships across language pairs. Each of these has significant implications for multilingual education policy practice in each context, such as how long students should be taught reading in their L1 to optimize transfer benefits and the degree of transfer that is likely to occur across language pairs, which may have bearing upon the timing in which curricula should begin to teach reading in second languages.

Author

• Carlos Joaquim Manuel, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane