Talking partners: A method which supports the Icelandic studies of multilingual students

Abstract

The number of students whose mother tongue is not Icelandic has grown significantly in Icelandic primary schools in the past few years. Thus, in 2020, 13 % of primary school pupils were native speakers of another language. It has been a challenge for teachers to meet the needs of those pupils, and there are indications of insufficient knowledge and resources to respond appropriately to their circumstances. Research into the children’s skills in Icelandic shows slow progress during primary school, leaving them well behind their monolingual peers. Language is the key to human interaction, and one must be able to master the local language to fully function as a community member. Children who perform weakly in the language concerned find it harder to be accepted by their peers than those with well-developed language skills. This fact may have long-term consequences for their social status. Vocabulary, one of the mainstays of language development, can be divided into basic and advanced. The basic variety consists of words used in everyday communication, whereas advanced vocabulary is more specialised, complex, and appropriate to formal circumstances.

Most people acquire a basic vocabulary in one or two years, but it takes considerably longer (six to ten years) to master the more advanced level. Conversation plays a major role in language acquisition. Through conversation, vocabulary and usage are learnt with support from a conversation partner. During conversations, a speaker can adjust his language use to his counterpart, choose suitable vocabulary and phrasing and explain further if needed. Children’s conversations with adults are a major source of their language acquisition and can also support the acquisition of a second language at any age. School is the main source of Icelandic for children learning it as a second language. It is vital to ensure that they are provided with conversation opportunities in school with both their peers and grown-ups. Teaching methods must nourish children’s interest in words and stimulate curiosity, helping them to maintain a lively interest in their studies.

This article describes an intervention research project where the study material Talking Partners was used with a group of 7–8 year old children learning Icelandic as a second language. The aim was to assess the suitability of the study material for strengthening the vocabulary, comprehension and expression skills of non-native children learning Icelandic. Does the method of Talking Partners positively impact the vocabulary and communication skills of children of foreign origin?

Three children in Year 2 were selected for the project because one foreign language was spoken in the children’s home, and they had been born in Iceland or had arrived here before the age of four. The children were given the code names Ari, Ágúst and Birta.

The intervention comprised instruction using the teaching material Talking Partners in a group of three pupils for ten weeks. The teacher met with the group three times a week for 30–35 minutes. The researcher planned the three future lessons each week. Tasks were chosen based on the pupils’ age and the available knowledge of their Icelandic skills. Special emphasis was placed on practising conversations, listening, vocabulary and selected grammar aspects.

Two language development tests were used to assess the children’s status and progress before and after the intervention; 1) Ísl-PPVT; a vocabulary test based on the English version PPVT-4 which assesses passive vocabulary; and 2) The Renfrew Action Picture Test; a language development test designed to meet the need for a standardised test measuring pupils’ communication, vocabulary, and grammar. The teacher also kept a journal during the intervention, recording each test period.

The overall result was that working with the group was a success; all were active, with the teacher’s support, repeating words he used and seeking pictorial assistance. One student sometimes had problems with concentration and conduct, including listening and obeying rules.

The children improved by 8–19 points in the Icel-PPVT test, which is similar to a year’s progress for monolingual children. Icelandic references do not exist for the Renfrew test, but an age comparison with English-speaking children indicates that the children’s performances before intervention resembled 4 or 5-year-olds. After the intervention, however, Ágúst and Birna performed similarly to 7 or 8-year-old children, whereas Ari’s performance was around the level of 5 year-olds.

The methods used in Talking Partners had a positive impact on the children’s vocabulary and communication. All three of them made progress to different degrees in both areas. All improved their performance in Icelandic, suggesting that the study material Talking Partners could be a suitable learning medium for these pupils.