raising tots Bilingually
Krashen & the Daily Yomiuri | Mike McDonald | December 2nd, 2003
When I turned to the "Letters to the Editor" column of the Daily Yomiuri today, I was very surprised to see a letter from Stephen Krashen. I didn't know he had a Japan connection, and I certainly didn't imagine that he would be reading the Daily Yomiuri in Los Angeles. What he had to say was actually quite interesting: he was responding to an article by Marshall R. Childs entitled "Raising Tots to Be Bilingual" (in his column "The Practical Linguist").
Childs approvingly describes several cases in which Japanese parents have raised their children to be bilingual by speaking to them in English from a very early age. Krashen responds,
"Parents' use of a foreign language with their children can backfire when parents do not speak the language well and communication is imperfect. Imperfect parent-child communication can cripple emotional and intellectual development. It isn't worth taking the chance."
What really startled me was another line in his letter:
"The research also tells us that there is no need to begin super-early; in fact, those who begin second languages later progress faster. It is more efficient to start at age 10 than at age 5."
This seems to contradict what I've read about SLA, such as the critical period hypothesis and the lateralisation theory. Is Krashen out on a limb here?
Mike McDonald
Editor's note: Here is the letter Steven Krashen wrote, taken from the Becta website:
Sent to the Daily Yomiuri, Japan, November 29, 2003
I understand parents' desires to "raise tots to be multilingual" (The
Practical Linguist, Nov. 29), but there is no need for
Japanese-speaking parents to talk their children in English. The
advantages are slight and can be had elsewhere, and there are dangers.
By far the easiest way to make sure children master other languages
are good programs in school, programs that fill the classroom hour
with interesting projects, games, and discussions, and that provide
children with lots of interesting reading, including comics,
magazines and good novels. The research strongly supports this
approach, but most foreign language programs hold on to painful and
inefficient methods that overemphasize grammar and memorization of
vocabulary. Those who do a great deal of pleasure reading in a second
language automatically develop a large vocabulary and as well as high
levels of grammatical accuracy. Research also tells us that there is
no need to begin super-early; in fact, those who begin second
languages later progress faster. It is more efficient to start at age
ten than at age five.
Parents' use of a foreign language with their children can backfire
when parents do not speak the language well and communication is
imperfect. Imperfect parent-child communication can cripple emotional
and intellectual development. It isn't worth taking the chance.
Stephen Krashen
Professor Emeritus
University of Southern California
Editor's note: Here is Marshall Child's response to Dr. Krashen, as reported in the ELT News website:
Krashen vs Childs - Part II
A letter printed in the Daily Yomiuri by the famous Stephen Krashen challenging an article by Marshall Childs has elicited the following response from the author (DY, Dec. 7. Unfortunately, the original article is no longer accessible on the DY site, except to paid subscribers) "No risk to children from bilingual upbringing "I am flattered to attract the attention, even the public criticism, of the famous Dr. Krashen (Letters, Dec. 2). But in this case I must protest that the good doctor seems to have gotten his preconceptions ahead of his facts.
"In response to my column, Krashen wrote that Japanese parents who presume to speak English to their children may actually damage the children with "imperfect" English, for imperfect communication "can cripple emotional and intellectual development."
"Certainly it is true that poor parent-child communication can have bad effects. developmental psychologists teach us the ways in which this can happen.
"But does "imperfect" English lead to poor parent-child communication? The logic is missing a middle step. Surely Krashen is not proposing that the child is able to judge and reject all but the Queen's English. Nor can he mean that "imperfct" English thrusts children into the condition of "wild children" (those few children, famous in psycholinguistic literature) who were denied access to any language and whose psychological development was indeed strange. What, then?
"Human beings use language and many other means to communicate love, security and other necessary messages. Judgements by others as to the degree of perfection of the languages used have nothing to do with the quality of a parent-child relationship or of the emotional and intellectual development of the child.
"To my knowledge, language that others may judge "imperfect" does not, by itself, cause bad communication. Parents and babies usually communicate quite well. The families I have studied were communication very well indeed.
"Where is the evidence that "imperfect" language impairs parent-child communication to the point of causing psychological damage? If Krashen is in possession of such evidence, he owes aily Yomiuri readers - and mankind - a full account of it.
"Marshall R. Childs, Numazu, Shizuoka Prefecture" (December 09, 2003)
Re: Krashen & the Daily Yomiuri | David Heywood | December 2nd, 2003
In 'How languages are learned' by Lightbown & Spada, they do mention research that backs up what Krashen is saying about starting later being more efficient. If the objective is native level then you should start as early as possible, but if you only want to achieve a certain communicative ability, then starting at 10 is more efficient. 10 year olds learn language much quicker than 5 year olds. Apparently. There are plenty of other factors mentioned, too, of course.
David Heywood
Re: Krashen & the Daily Yomiuri | Lori Solbakken | December 3rd, 2003
Interesting, Mike. Thanks for the link. Krashen keeps popping in and out of Taiwan too, so guess he has lots of connections in Asia.
I would argue that when learners start later in a place like Taiwan where they're inundated with testing in every subject at that age, they'd not progress as quickly as they do when they're little. A lot of Taiwanese parents like to send their kids to English-only kindergartens to bypass the rigors and get a stress-free head start on English. Problem for teachers is that when they do begin teaching English in primary school, 3 rd grade (soon lowered to 1 st grade in Taiwan), they're met with a wide array of English language levels in their classes.
If Krashen's theory is in fact correct, he still should take into consideration the type of education programmes available in the countries he's speaking of. I imagine Japan is very similar to Taiwan and that kids as young as 3 rd grade have lots of homework and tests in all subjects, and adding English at this point becomes just another subject to study, and motivation wanes.
Lori
with 
and 
