Brandon Yost, ESOL Instructor,
Washington County School District
Dinah Scott, ESL Specialist,
Washington County School District
Pair-Share: Have
studied abroad?
Prizes!
you

Features of the ideal foreign language acquisition study abroad (FLA SA)
setting “to achieve meaningful linguistic gains through out-of-class
contact and make the sojourn experience worthwhile” (p. 51)

Students need:
 Consistent and substantive interactions with NS
 Proficient in speaking and writing
 Supportive interlocutors

Reality
 Usually not reported in the literature
 Challenge belief that SA is best setting

No guarantees: FLA SA studies report inconsistent
results
More than just SA setting
Variables interconnected
Complex and unstable
Difficult to isolate and control

Recommendation: Second Language Socialization
(SLS) perspective
Connection among SA, learner identity, and SLS
Close examination of learners in SA environment
The Effects of Intensive Study Abroad and At Home Language Programs on
Second Language Acquisition of Spanish (D’Amico, 2010)

Literature Review
 FLA SA becoming more common
 Impact of SA on L2 remains “intricate and hard to define” (p. 28)
 Mixed results: Benefits of both SA and AH programs depending on nature of study
 In general, SA has positive impact on linguistic and extra-linguistic features
 “The simple belief that the SA context will produce ‘perfect’ or ‘native-like’ L2
speakers is unrealistic” (p. 29).

Study
 10 U.S. university students in six-week SA in Spain; control group in AH program
 Fluency focus

Results
 SA students showed L2 fluency gains and increased willingness to communicate, but
results “not drastically different from the AH learners” (p. 168).
 “(L)earners were able to make some gains in fluency in . . . a short time frame” (p. 153).

Recommendations
 No “fast track” to native-like L2 use; Set realistic and practical program goals.
Social Interaction and Linguistic Gain During Study Abroad
(Magnan & Back, 2007)

Institute of International Education report: 93.5% SA programs are shortterm (p. 44)

Study
 24 US university students; one semester SA in France
 Questionnaires, Can-Do self-assessment, OPI, and Language Contact
Profile (p. 47)

Results
 SA programs contribute to FLA; “no recipe to ensure language
improvement” (p. 56)
 Contact with TL is key; no one form of contact guarantees FLA

Recommendations
 Advanced TL coursework before SA experience
 When in France, “do not speak French with other Americans” (p. 57).
 Use more instruments more often
ESL Teacher Education Abroad and at Home: A Cautionary Tale
(Pray & Marx, 2012)

Study
 Comparison: Pre-service teachers in Mexico and in U.S.
 Perceptions of culturally-appropriate language teaching

Mixed Results
 Developed a “more empathetic understanding of language and cultural
issues” (p. 216)
 Overgeneralized own SA experience with ELLs’ experience in U.S.
 Understood benefits of using L1 in language learning

Recommendations
 Teach SA courses and on-campus counterparts differently
 Teach differences between students’ short-term SA experience & long-
term immigrants’ experience
 Address misunderstandings related to language and culture
 SA: A complement to on-campus programs—not a replacement

The Impact of an International Field Experience on Preservice Teachers
(Pence & Macgillivray, 2008)
Study
 Gauge impact of short-term SA experience
 Data sources: journals, focus groups, observations, reflection paper,
course evaluations, questionnaire one year later

Professional and Personal Results
 Increased confidence
 Greater appreciation and respect for cultural diversity
 Increased awareness of role of feedback and reflection

Program Planning Recommendations
 “Importance of self-reflection cannot be overstated” (p. 24).
 Carefully selected supervisors provide support and feedback
 Two-fold focus: cultural diversity and personal/professional growth
 Goal: produce lifelong learners who advocate for students and families
 44
South Korean Student Teachers came
to USA to full student-teaching internship
for two months in Jan & Feb 2012
 Student Teachers were placed in both
elementary and secondary classrooms
with a cooperating teacher, based upon
each student teachers’ content area of
emphasis
 Student-teachers
were also placed in
English Speaking host family homes for
the duration of their stay in USA
 Emphasis of their internship was to
develop pedagogical knowledge to make
them a better teacher in South Korea,
being able to contrast the experience of
South Korean Education system with the
U.S. Education system
 Each
Student-Teacher had to be in either
their Junior or Senior year of their
education program
 All content coursework must have been
completed
 Every student-teacher doing the Study
Abroad internship had to meet TOEFL
score requirements expected of
incoming international students at most
colleges
 Does
English language proficiency
improve during short-term studentteaching internships?
 Student-Teachers
were given a pre-test
(upon arrival at beginning of January), a
mid-test (end of January), and post-test
(end of February)
 Each testing session utilized different
forms of the test so that participants did
not see the same questions again
 Six
areas were tested using two different
tests
• Michigan Test – Listening, Grammar, Vocabulary,
and Reading
• Quick Informal Assessment (QIA) – Speaking &
Writing
 The
Listening Test consisted of 20
multiple choice questions
 The questions were played on an audio
CD
 These questions were the first part of the
Michigan Test
 The
Grammar Test consisted of 30
questions
 These questions were numbers 21-50 of
the Michigan Test
 The Vocabulary Test
consisted of 30
questions
 These questions were numbers 51-80 of
the Michigan Test
 The
Reading Test consisted of 20
questions
 These questions were numbers 81-100 of
the Michigan Test
A
writing prompt was given to the
students to write an essay about
 Each essay was blindly scored by two
scorers
 Scores that differed by more than one
point were discussed by each reviewer
until consensus was made on the score
 The
Speaking Test consisted of multiple
questions that progressively became
more difficult
 Once the student’s oral proficiency was
determined, the test ended; thus, some
students answered 16-20 questions while
others answered much fewer questions
than that
 Statistically
Signicant!
• Growth in Listening during 2nd month!
• Growth in Grammar across the two months
combined!
• Reading (no growth from pre-post… drop off at
mid test could be due to stress, fatigue)
 No
Statistical Significance
• Two months is too short a time to see gains in
Speaking, Reading, Vocabulary Acquisition, and
Writing

Improving ESL Learners' Listening Skills: At the Workplace and Beyond
(Van Duzer, 1997)
Listening is demanding.
 Listener, speaker, context, and level of visual support
 Critical activity during ELs’ silent period and beyond

Listening is complex.
 Many non-sequential processes occurring both simultaneously and in
rapid succession
 Both bottom-up and top-down processes

Effective listening activities
 Provide relevant tasks and authentic materials
 Foster complex processing
 Teach strategies
 Have broad application

Listening plays a critical role in communication and in SLA.
 Future
groups are going to receive
English training in regards to Listening
and Grammar
• Specifically idiomatic phrases
 Qualitative
studies to be done on
perceptions of culture upon arriving
contrasted with perceptions when
leaving
 What
 How
questions do you have?
does this study connect to your own
study abroad experiences?
References
D’Amico, M. L. (2010). The effects of intensive study abroad and at home language programs on
second language acquisition of Spanish (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest
LLC, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Florida. (ISBN: 978-1-1245-1390-4)
Magnan, S.S., & Back, M. (2007). Social interaction and linguistic gain during study abroad.
Foreign Language Annuals, 40(1), 43-61.
Pence, H. M., & Macgillivray, I. K. (2008). The impact of an international field experience on
preservice teachers. Teaching & Teacher Education, 24(1), 14-25.
Pray, L., & Marx, S. (2010). ESL teacher education abroad and at home A cautionary tale. The
Teacher Educator, 45(3), 216-229. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2010.488099
Van Duzer, C. (1997). Improving ESL learners' listening skills: At the workplace and beyond.
Retrieved September 15, 2012, from the Center for Applied Linguistics website:
http://www.cal.org/caela/esl_resources/digests/listenqa.html
Wang, C. (2010). Toward a second language socialization perspective: Issues in study abroad
research. Foreign Language Annals, 43(1), 50-63.