A Trilingual Teaching Model for
Developing Academic Literacy Skills in
Classical Arabic (L1), Hebrew (L2) and
English (FL) in Southern Israel
Dr. Rachel Tal
Dr. Sara Hauptman
Hubert Humphrey Fellow, 2006-2007
Head of English Studies,
Amal Network
Literacy and Literature Dept.,
Achva Academic College of,
Education, Be’er Tuvia
6 May 2010
Today’s Agenda
 Overview of Trilingual Literacy
 Brief Literature Review
 Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model
 Research Population
 Research Tools
 Research Findings
This presentation is based on a study written by Dr. Sara Hauptman, Dr. Fuaz
Mansur and Dr. Rachel Tal, entitled “A Trilingual Teaching Model for Developing
Academic Literacy Skills in Classical Arabic (L1), Hebrew (L2) and English (FL) in
Southern Israel” which appeared in the Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development, Vol. 29, No. 3, 2008.
Why Trilingual Literacy
 Many students in the Bedouin sector have similar
problems in reading comprehension and writing in the
three languages – Arabic, Hebrew and English
 Sought strategies for advancing students’ skills in all three
languages at the same time:
 Trigger transfer of strategies from one language to another
 Foster teamwork between teachers of the three different
languages
 Make students appreciate the commonalities between
languages and cultures
Overview
 The trilingual teaching environment, in which English is
studied as a supplemental third language in addition to a
mother tongue and a second language, is utilised for many
student populations around the world
 In Israel, Bedouin students need to succeed in
matriculation exams in Classical Arabic (L1), Hebrew (L2)
and English (FL) (Spolsky & Shohami, 1999)
 This trilingual literacy teaching model was developed
especially for 10th-grade Bedouin students in the south of
Israel
Overview (cont)
 Model focused on academic literacy skills: developing
and promoting strategies for understanding texts of
different genres and developing tools for writing short
essays (Bravick, 1986; Flower, 1987; Flower & Hays, 1981;
Hauptman, 1995; Tirney & Pearson, 1988) in each of the
three languages.
 These issues belong to the realm of Cognitive Academic
Linguistic Proficiency (CALP) and constitute the academic
aspects of the mastery of a language.
 Due to brevity of the intervention, the study focused on
specific aspects of CALP, primarily genre conventions and
basic reading and writing strategies.
Literature Review
 Research shows that the trilingual learning environment is
complex and multidimensional (Herdina & Jessner, 2000, 2002;
Jessner & Cenoz, 2000a).
 There is a positive cognitive influence of the level of
performance and mastery in L1 and L2 on the level or
performance and mastery of the third language (Cenoz, 2000).
 The reciprocal influence of the three languages is not linear, but
rather multidirectional and dynamic (Jessner & Cenoz, 2000a).
Within this process there are interactions between various
linguistic, social and personal factors. Each factor affects the
entire process, which creates a global course of ‘language
management skills’ (Jessner & Cenoz, 2000: 93). This assists the
learner to make connections and distinctions between the
languages.
Literature Review (cont)
 The study of English as a foreign language (EFL) influences
performance of the first language (Kecses & Papp, 2000a).
 Herdina and Jessner (2000) argue that the process of
learning three languages is unique and multidimensional,
based on multilingual proficiency (2002) resulting from the
interactions of multiple subsystems, including graphophonemic, syntactic, lexical, semantic and ‘textual’ or ‘genre’
systems; each subsystem in one language system interacting
variously with other subsystems within the same language
system (LS1) and the other language system (LS2).
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model – Theoretical Basis
 This model is based on three assumptions in keeping with
the research literature:
Transfer of cognitive and academic skills across languages:

Adult students learning two or three languages are able to
recognize a pattern from one language system and transfer it to
another. Kecses and Papp (2000b) believe there is a considerable
transfer of cognitive and academic skills across languages.

McLaughlin’s (1990), research which followed the theory of Carroll
(1967), found that students transfer linguistic knowledge
regarding the cognitive mechanism for language acquisition.
McLaughlin shows that expert students create their own schemas
and strategies of reading comprehension that they generate from
their experiences in reading texts in their mother tongue.
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model –
Theoretical Basis (cont)
Common Conceptual Principles:

The second assumption is the perception concerning the essence
of the academic literacy principles as universal cross-linguistic
ones. This perception is based on the approach presented by
Kecses and Papp (2000a) in their research where they coined the
term Common Underlying Conceptual Based (CUCB) to denote
that basic cross-linguistic conceptual principles underlie different
types of texts the student is reading or writing.

Other researchers such as Biber (1986), Corson (1997), Gibbons
and Lascar (1998) and Halliday and Hasan (1985) defined the
various characteristics of the theoretical academic layer of texts
as cross-linguistic and applicable to any language.
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model –
Theoretical Basis (cont)
Cross-Lingual Interactions:

The third assumption is based on the perception that the
trilingual learning environment allows cross-linguistic
interactions (Cenoz & Genesee, 1998).

Eakle (2003) and Fitzgerald (1995) claim that after analyzing
dozens of study programs designed to promote English as L2 or
FL, most of the programs (except the cross-linguistic programs
presented by Cummins, which account for 2.5% of all the
programs) are programs where English is taught without relating
to the multilingual system surrounding the learner. They argue
that most of the programs are not based on a constructivist
approach, where teachers assist the learners in utilizing their
knowledge of other languages to improve the target language.
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model
 Unique trilingual learning environment that enabled dynamic
interaction between languages.
 This environment had two main features:
 A trilingual textbook
 Pedagogy of coordination between the three languages
 Teachers assisted the learners in utilizing their knowledge of
other languages to improve the target language.
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model – Textbook
 Textbook had three sections –one for each language:
 Part I Arabic (L1)
 Part II Hebrew (L2)
 Part III English
 Each section contained a selection of literary and academic
text genres, such as an informative text, an opinion piece,
blurbs, a personal letter, a folktale, a fable and so forth.
 Each genre was presented in a separate section and
appeared in all three languages.
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model – Textbook (cont)
 Each section contained 3-6 texts that demonstrated the
genre. In addition, reading comprehension exercises which
related both to the comprehension of the text in question
and the analysis of the rhetorical, communicative and
linguistic features of the genre were included. We also
included a section with writing exercises related to the
texts in question and the genre being studied.
 For example, in the section on blurbs, the students were
asked to write one or two paragraphs for a book cover for a
story. This activity was repeated in every language.
 Texts in each language were authentic and had not been
translated from one language to another.
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model –
Pedagogical Coordination
 This model is based on pedagogical coordination between the
three languages within the learning process:
 Identical strategies of reading comprehension and writing
skills taught simultaneously by the Arabic, Hebrew and
English teachers to promote academic mastery in all three
languages.
 Teaching model promoted CALP in all three languages, using
cross-linguistic teaching tools in trilingual learning
environment.
 Due to brevity of the intervention, the study focused on
specific aspects of CALP, primarily genre conventions and
basic reading and writing strategies.
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model –
Pedagogical Coordination (cont)
 The teachers of Arabic, Hebrew and English worked as one
team after attending a joint in-service course where they
learned the method and its principles and were familiarized
with the study materials.
 Together they decided:
 In what order the different genres would be taught and what
would be the specific reading and writing topics to be
addressed in each genre.
 How long it would take to teach each genre in all three
languages in light of the reading and writing topics to be
addressed and the expected difficulties in teaching the genres
in each language.
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model – Pedagogical
Coordination (cont)
 The order and timing of the linking between the languages, in
other words, whether a new topic should always be
introduced first in Arabic (L1) or whether there were topics
that would be better to present first in Hebrew (L2) or in
English (FL).
 Implementation of a trilingual bulletin board in each
classroom where the written products of the program in each
of the three languages could be posted. This bulletin board
helped foster the educational atmosphere of the program.
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model –
Methodology

Students were trained to create explicit and active transfer between
the languages: from mother tongue (Arabic) to the second language
(Hebrew) and from both of these to the third language (EFL).

The strategies and skills taught included the following: finding the
main idea and supporting details, comparing and contrasting,
sequencing, summarizing, using context skills, problem solving,
guessing meaning of words from context, activating prior knowledge
and predicting.

The model was based on the creation of a trilingual learning
environment where universal principles create a bridge between the
languages. The selected study materials and activities emphasized the
cross-linguistic principles present in both reading comprehension and
in writing. These principles were modeled and practiced in L1 (Arabic),
L2 (Hebrew) and in English (FL).
Trilingual Literacy Teaching Model –
Methodology (cont)

The model attempted to develop academic literacy skills within a
trilingual model, based on preplanned coordination between the
topics studied in all three languages.

In the resulting trilingual learning environment, every reading or
writing topic was worked on simultaneously in all three languages.
For example, students were taught about blurbs in each language and
then given blurbs in all three languages. They were then taught what
conventions blurbs follow and were asked to find information such as
the title of a book, the author, genre and the topic of the book.

Specific academic exercises were conducted in the same way in all
three languages and enabled a constructivist transfer of literacy
knowledge and allowed cross-linguistic interactions.
Research Questions
1. Will this cross-linguistic program affect scores in Arabic
(L1), Hebrew (L2) or in English (FL)? Which of the three
languages will benefit the most?
2. Which areas of reading comprehension and/or writing
skills will improve in terms of students’ scores after
participating in the trilingual literacy program?
Research Population – Bedouin Sector
 Much of the Bedouin population in the south of Israel
have difficult living conditions, and relatively low
socioeconomic status (Abu-Saad, 1995, 1997).
 The aggregate of cultural, social and geographical factors
inpedes the successful education of the Bedouin
population in the south of the country (Ben-David, 2004)
The resulting deprivation directly or indirectly affects
scholastic achievements in general and literacy
achievements in particular.
Research Population – Bedouin Sector (cont)
 The phenomenon of diglossia for all mother-tongue speakers of
Arabic (Ferguson, 1959) presents an added challenge. Although
they speak Arabic, they in effect need to be bilingual due to the
diglossic nature of Arabic. The sharp variations in the informal
language spoken in different Arabic-speaking countries make it
necessary to use both forms of the language, formal (Classical
Arabic) and informal (spoken). For this reason, this study focused
on the Classical Arabic taught in school.
 Bedouin students do not usually grow up in a literacy-rich
environment; they are not typically surrounded by daily
newspapers or reading books in any of the three languages. On
this issue, Cummins (2000a), Cummins et al. (1987) and Diaz
(2000) claim that the nature of society and socioeconomics of such
an environment is a decisive factor in the progress towards
academic literacy.
Research Population – Participants
 This study included 249 10th-grade students, aged 15-16, in
lower level classes. (Lower level readers are students who do
not meet grade level reading requirements, find reading
difficult and who struggle with comprehension skills).
 The students’ mother tongue was Arabic and they were
exposed to Hebrew from the third grade (ages 8-9).
 Students performed below level in reading comprehension in
the three languages as determined by their scores on the
national exam.
 They attended high schools in the Negev area which were
exclusively for Bedouin students.
Research Population – Participants (cont)
 The participants attended high schools in the Negev area which
were exclusively for Bedouin students.
 There were 191 students in the experimental group, 89 boys
and 102 girls, and 58 in the control group, 27 boys and 31 girls.
 The control group consisted of 10th-grade Bedouin students
(ages 15-16) in the Negev. They also began Hebrew instruction
in Grade 3 and English instruction in Grade 4. According to the
results of the national exam, they were not proficient in the L1,
L2 and FL.
 The students in the control and experimental groups came
from low socio-economic backgrounds, as well as parents with
little schooling.
Research Tools
This study used three official State exams to test linguistics
knowledge and literacy in each language, for students aged
15-16:
1. A test in Arabic as mother tongue and second official
language of the country (AL1).
2. A test in Hebrew as the first/second language and first
official language of the country. Here we used the
scoring rubric for Hebrew as a second language (HL2).
3. A test in EFL.
Research Tools (cont)

The three exams have the same structure:
 Part I: academic texts with exercises to ascertain
linguistic knowledge and reading comprehension
 Part II: a writing task to ascertain writing ability.
 Each exam has a fixed official scoring rubric.
Research Tools (cont)

To answer our research questions we analyzed the
achievements of the research population in two ways:

Examination and analysis of the final global score for each
examinee according to a frame of reference of 100% as
determined in the rubric.

A comparison of achievements for identical items in
reading comprehension and writing abilities for each
examinee in each language. Here 100% was given for each
item individually in order to evaluate specific differences
between the languages as accurately as possible.

For reading comprehension, three key skills were evaluated:
(a) understanding the main idea, (b) comprehension of key
words and (c) comprehension of text structure.

For the writing task, three aspects were evaluated: (a) content,
(b) structure and (c) language and style.
Research Procedures
 The students participating in the trilingual literacy
experimental program were tested in three exams before
the program started, and again after the program had
ended.
 Four months elapsed between the two sets of exams.
 The control group also took these tests at the same time.
 The exams were anonymous (each student had an
identifying number used for all six exams) and were
checked by the district counselors for the three languages.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the support of a grant from Amal
Network, Tel Aviv, Israel.
We are also grateful to Prof. Elana Shohamy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv,
Israel, for her comments on the first version of the paper on this study.