Page2

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

Wanted:ATheoreticalFrameworkforRelatingLanguageProficiencytoAcademicAchievementamongBilingualStudents1
JimCummins TheOntarioInstituteforStudiesinEducation Itisarguedinthepresentpaperthatamajorreasonfortheconfusedstateoftheartoflanguageproficiencyassessmentinbilingualprograms(andindeedforthe confusionsurroundingtherationaleforbilingualeducation)stemsfromthefailuretodevelopanadequatetheoreticalframeworkforrelatinglanguageproficiencyto academicachievement.Withoutsuchatheoreticalframeworkitisimpossibleeithertodeveloprationalentryandexitcriteriaforbilingualprogramsortodesigntesting procedurestoassessthesecriteria.Beforeelaboratingthepresenttheoreticalframework,anoutlineoftheevolutionofitscentraltenetswillbepresented.Thepurpose ofthisistwofold:first,toillustratehowtheconstructof"languageproficiency"iscentraltoavarietyofseeminglyindependentissuesintheeducationoflanguage minorityandmajoritystudentsandsecond,tohelpclarifyhowthepresentframeworkisrelatedtotheoreticalconstructselaboratedinpreviouspapers. EvolutionoftheTheoreticalFramework Considerationoftheapparentlycontradictoryinfluencesofbilingualismoncognitiveandacademicfunctioningreportedinresearchliteraturegaverisetoaninitial hypothesisregardingtherelationshipbetweenbilingualskillsandcognition.Basedonthefactthatthedevelopmentofageappropriateproficiencyintwolanguages appearedtobeassociatedwithcognitiveadvantages,whereastheattainmentofonlyrelativelylowlevelsof

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page3

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

bilingualproficiencywasassociatedwithcognitivedisadvantages,itwashypothesizedthattheremaybetwothresholdlevelsoflinguisticproficiency:Thefirst,lower, thresholdmustbeattainedbybilingualchildreninordertoavoidcognitivedisadvantagesandthesecond,higher,thresholdwasnecessarytoallowthepotentially beneficialaspectsofbilingualismtoinfluencecognitivegrowth(Cummins,1976,1979Toukomaa&SkutnabbKangas,1977). Thepostulationoftwothresholdswasclearlyspeculativebutthehypothesishasprovedusefulininterpretingsubsequentresearchfindings(e.g.Duncan&DeAvila, 1979Kessler&Quinn,1980).Oneoftheissuesraisedbythehypothesishasrecentlyemergedasacentralquestionintheeducationaldebateaboutexitcriteriain thecontextofU.S.bilingualprograms,namely:"WhendoesalanguageminoritystudenthavesufficientEnglishproficiency(i.e.athresholdlevel)toparticipate effectivelyinanallEnglishclassroom?" However,thehypothesisdidnotconsiderinanydepththenatureofthebilingualproficiencieswhichconstitutedthe"thresholds",excepttonotethatthethresholds wouldvaryaccordingtothelinguisticandcognitivedemandsofthecurriculumatdifferentgrades.Thiswasconsideredtobeanempiricalissuehowever,asthe continuingdebateaboutexitcriteriademonstrates,relevantempiricalstudiesremaintobedone. Thethresholdhypothesiswasintendedtoprovideaframeworkforpredictingthecognitiveandacademiceffectsofdifferentformsofbilingualism.However,inits initialformulation(Cummins,1976),therelationshipsbetweenthefirstlanguage(L1)andthesecondlanguage(L2)proficiencieswerenotexplicitlyconsidered.The thresholdhypothesiswaslater(Cummins,1978)supplementedbythe"interdependence"hypothesiswhichsuggestedthatL1andL2academicproficiencieswere developmentallyinterdependent,i.e.ineducationalcontextsthedevelopmentofL2proficiencywaspartiallydependentuponthepriorlevelofdevelopmentofL1 proficiency.Thus,asreportedinitiallybySkutnabbKangas&Toukomaa(1976)andreplicatedinsubsequentstudies(seeCummins,1981a,forareview),older immigrantstudents(1012yearsold),whoseacademicproficiency(e.g.literacyskills)inL1waswellestablished,developedL2academicproficiencymorerapidly thanyoungerimmigrantstudents.TheyalsoattainedhigherlevelsofL1academicproficiency. FollowingSkutnabbKangas&Toukomaa(1976),adistinctionwasmadebetweenL2"surfacefluency"andmorecognitivelyandacademicallyrelatedaspectsof languageproficiency(Cummins,1979).Becausetheliteracyskillsofmanylanguageminoritystudentswereconsiderablybelowageappropriatelevels,itwas suggestedthattheabilityofthesestudentsto

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page4

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

converseinpeerappropriatewaysineverydayfacetofacesituations(inbothL1andL2)represented,insomerespects,a"linguisticfacade"hidinglargegapsin academicallyrelatedaspectsofL1andL2proficiency(Cummins,1979SkutnabbKangas&Toukomaa,1976).However,itwasstronglyemphasizedthatlanguage minoritystudents'educationaldeficitswereafunctionofinappropriatetreatmentbytheschool,andthattheirbasiccognitiveabilitiesandcommandofthelinguistic systemoftheirL1wereinnosensedeficient(e.g.Cummins,1979,p.240). Insubsequentpapers(Cummins,1980a,1980b)thesetwoaspectsoflanguageproficiencywerereferredtoas"basicinterpersonalcommunicativeskills"(BICS)and "cognitiveacademiclanguageproficiency"(CALP).Thedistinctionwasformalizedinthiswayinordertofacilitatecommunicationtopractitionersinvolvedin educatinglanguageminoritystudents.Asoutlinedlaterinthispaper,thefailureofeducatorstotakeaccountofthisdistinctionwas(andis)activelycontributingtothe academicfailureoflanguageminoritystudents.Forexample,becausestudentsappeartobeabletoconverseeasilyinEnglish,psychologistsoftenconsiderit appropriatetoadministeranindividualnormreferencedverbalIQ(CALP)test.Similarly,studentsarefrequentlyexitedfrombilingualclassroomsontheassumption thatbecausetheyhaveattainedapparentlyfluentEnglishfacetofacecommunicativeskills,theyare,therefore,"Englishproficient"andcapableofsurvivinginanall Englishclassroom. TheCALPBICSdistinctionwasnotadistinctionbetween"communicative"and"cognitive"aspectsoflanguageproficiency.Itwasemphasized(Cummins,1980b) thatBICSreferredonlytosomesalientrapidlydevelopedaspectsofcommunicativeproficiencyandthatchildren'ssocialandpragmaticcommunicativeskills encompassedmuchmorethantherelativelysuperficialaspects(e.g.accent,fluency,etc.)uponwhicheducatorsfrequentlybasedtheirintuitivejudgementsoflanguage minoritystudents'Englishproficiency.Similarly,itwasstressedthatCALPwassociallygroundedandcouldonlydevelopwithinamatrixofhumaninteraction. WithintheframeworkoftheCALPBICSdistinction,theinterdependencehypothesiswasreformulatedintermsofthe"commonunderlyingproficiency"(CUP)model ofbilingualproficiencyinwhichCALPinL1andL2(e.g.readingskills)wereregardedasmanifestationsofoneunderlyingdimension(Cummins,1980b,1981a).This commonunderlyingproficiencyistheoreticallycapableofbeingdevelopedthroughinstructionineitherlanguage.Thus,instructioninSpanishinaU.S.bilingual programforlanguageminoritystudentsorinstructioninFrenchinaCanadianFrenchimmersionprogramformajoritystudentsisnotdevelopingonlySpanishor

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page5

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

Frenchacademicskills:itisalsodevelopingthegeneralcognitiveandacademicabilitieswhichunderlieEnglishachievementhence,therapidtransferofliteracyskills acrosslanguagesobservedintheseprograms.Whetherornotinstructioninaparticularlanguage(L1orL2)willsuccessfullydevelopCALPwilldependon socioculturalfactorsasmuchaspedagogicalfactors(Cummins,1980b). Inthepresentchapter,thedistinctionthatwasmadebetweenCALPandBICSiselaboratedintoatheoreticalframeworkforrelatinglanguageproficiencyto academicachievementamongbilingualstudents.Theterms"CALP"and"BICS"arenotusedbecauseofconcernsexpressedaboutpossiblemisinterpretationoftheir meaningandimplications.However,thebasicdistinctionshighlightedbythesetermsareunchanged.Thenecessitytomakesuchdistinctionscanbeillustratedbythe confusedstateoftheartoflanguageproficiencyassessmentinbilingualprograms. LanguageProficiencyAssessmentinBilingualPrograms Acursoryexaminationofthemanytestsoflanguageproficiencyanddominancecurrentlyavailableforassessingbilingualstudents(see,e.g.DeAvila&Duncan,1978 Dieterich,Freeman&Crandall,1979)revealsenormousvariationinwhattheypurporttomeasure.Ofthe46testsexaminedbyDeAvila&Duncan(1978),onlyfour includedameasureofphonemeproduction,43claimedtomeasurevariouslevelsoflexicalability,34includeditemsassessingoralsyntaxcomprehensionandnine attemptedtoassesspragmaticaspectsoflanguage. Thisvariationinlanguagetestsisnotsurprisinginviewofthelackofconsensusastothenatureoflanguageproficiencyor"communicativecompetence".Forexample, HernandezChavez,Burt&Dulay(1978)haveoutlinedamodeloflanguageproficiencycomprising64separatecomponents,eachofwhich,hypotheticallyatleast,is independentlymeasurable.Bycontrast,Oller&Perkins(1980)havearguedthat:
"asinglefactorofgloballanguageproficiencyseemstoaccountforthelion'sshareofvarianceinawidevarietyofeducationaltestsincludingnonverbalandverbalIQmeasures, achievementbatteries,andevenpersonalityinventoriesandaffectivemeasures...theresultstodateare...preponderantlyinfavoroftheassumptionthatlanguageskill pervadeseveryareaoftheschoolcurriculumevenmorestronglythanwaseverthoughtbycurriculumwritersortesters"(p.1).

ThisglobaldimensionisnotregardedbyOller(1981)astheonlysignificantfactorinlanguageproficiency,buttheamountofadditional

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page6

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

varianceaccountedforbyotherfactorsisrelativelymodest. TheconsiderableevidencethatOllerandhiscolleagues(e.g.Oller&Perkins,1980)haveassembledtoshowthatacademicandcognitivevariablesarestrongly relatedtoatleastsomemeasuresofallfourgenerallanguageskills(i.e.listening,speaking,readingandwriting)raisesanimportantissuefortheassessmentofentry andexitcriteriainbilingualprograms:Towhatextentshouldmeasuresoflanguageproficiencyberelatedtomeasuresofacademicachievement?Inotherwords,to whatextentdoestheconstructoflanguageproficiencyoverlapwiththeconstructsof"intelligence"andacademicachievement? Thistheoreticalquestionhasrarelybeenaskedinstead,researchershaveeitheraskedonlytheempiricalquestionofhowlanguageproficiencyisrelatedto achievement(oftenexpressedintermsoftherelationbetween"orallanguage"andreading)orelseignoredtheissueentirely,presumablybecausetheydonotconsider itrelevanttolanguageproficiencyassessmentinbilingualeducation.However,thetheoreticalissuecannotbeavoided.Therelationshipoflanguageproficiencyto academicachievementmustbeconsideredinviewofthefactthatacentralpurposeinassessingminoritystudents'languagedominancepatternsistoassignstudentsto classestaughtinthelanguagethroughwhich,itisassumed,theyaremostcapableoflearning,andinwhichtheywillmostreadilyacquireacademicskills.Ifmeasures oflanguageproficiencybearnorelationshiptostudents'acquisitionofacademicskills,theirrelevanceinthecontextofentryandexitcriteriaisopentoquestion.This issuerequirestheoreticalratherthanempiricalresolutionbecause,aswillbediscussedbelow,somelanguagemeasurescorrelatehighlywithachievementwhileothers showanegligiblerelationship.Withoutatheoreticalframeworkwithinwhichlanguageproficiencycanberelatedtothedevelopmentofacademicskillsthereisno basisforchoosingbetweenalternativetestswhichareclearlymeasuringverydifferentthingsundertheguiseof"languageproficiency." Essentially,whatisatissuearethecriteriatobeusedindeterminingthevalidityoflanguageproficiencymeasuresinthespecificcontextofbilingualeducation.Whether wearetalkingaboutcontent,criterionreferenced,construct,face,orecologicalvalidity,ourproceduresfordeterminingvalidityarealwaysbasedonatheory regardingthenatureofthephenomenonbeingmeasured.Inmanycases,however,thistheoryhasremainedimplicitinlanguagetestdevelopmentforbilingualstudents and,wherethetheoryhasbeenmadeexplicit,theconstructoflanguageproficiencyhasusuallybeenregardedasindependentoftheconstructsofintellectualand academicabilities. Thus,itisreported(seeOakland,1977,p.199)thatontheBasic

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page7

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

LanguageCompetenceBattery(Cervenka,1972)thereislittleornoincreaseinscoresacrosstheelementarygradesamongnativespeakers.Thisisinterpretedas evidencefortheconstructvalidityofthebatteryinthatitisindeedmeasuring"languageknowledge"ratherthanintellectualabilitiesoreducationalachievement.In arguingagainst"languagedeficit"theories,manysociolinguists(e.g.Labov,1969Shuy,1979)havesimilarlyassertedthatlanguageproficiencyisindependentof cognitiveandacademicperformance.Shuy(1979,p.5),forexample,statesthat"rathercompellingevidencerejectseveryclaimmadebythosewhoattempttoshow linguisticcorrelatesofcognitivedeficit". Oneapparentimplicationofthetheoreticalpositionthat"languageproficiency"isindependentofintellectualabilitiesandacademicachievementisthatlanguage measuressuchastheintegrativetests(e.g.oralcloze,dictation,elicitedimitation)usedintheresearchofOllerandothers(seeOller&Perkins,1980)wouldhaveto berejectedasinvalidtoassesstheconstructof"languageproficiency"becauseoftheirstrongrelationshipstoachievementandIQ.2 Manytheoristswouldregardanyformofcontrivedtestsituationasinadequatetoassesslanguageproficiency,arguinginsteadforprocedureswhichassesschildren's languageinnaturallyoccurringcommunicativesituations(e.g.Cazden,Bond,Epstein,Matz,&Savignon,1977Dieterichetal.,1979).Forexample,Dieterichetal. (1979)argueinrelationtoanelicitedimitationtaskthat"itmirrorsnorealspeechsituationandisthusofquestionablevalidityinassessingproficiency"(p.541). Althoughtherequirementthatproficiencymeasuresreflect"naturallyoccurringspeechsituations"isabasicprincipleofvalidityformanytheorists,fewpursuetheissue toinquirewhetherornotthecommunicativedemandsofnaturalfacetofacesituationsareidenticaltostudent'sopportunitytonegotiatemeaningwiththeinterlocutor (teacher)isconsiderablyreducedasaresultofsharinghimorherwithabout2530otherstudents.Thereisalsoconsiderableemphasisondevelopingproficiencyin processingwrittentextwherethemeaningissupportedlargelybylinguisticcuesratherthanthericher"reallife"cuesoffacetofacecommunication. Theseissuesarebeingraisednottoargueagainsttheassessmentof"languageproficiency"innaturallyoccurringsituationsbutrathertoshowtheneedforatheoretical frameworkwhichwouldallowtheconstructoflanguageproficiencytobeconceptualizedinrelationtotheacquisitionofacademicskillsinbilingualprograms.The urgencyofthisneedcanbeseenfromthefactthatthemostcommonlyusedtestsoflanguageproficiencyand

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page8

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

dominanceforminoritystudentsclearlyembodydifferenttheoreticalassumptionsinregardtotherelationshipbetweenlanguageproficiencyandachievement.The LanguageAssessmentScales(LAS)(DeAvila&Duncan,1977),forexample,arereportedtoconsistentlyshowmoderatecorrelationswithacademicachievement whereastheBilingualSyntaxMeasure(BSM)(Burt,Dulay,&HernandezChevez,1975)andtheBasicInventoryofNaturalLanguage(BINL)(Herbert,1977) tendtoshowmuchlowercorrelationswithachievement(seeRosansky,1981,forareview).Allofthesetestsshowedlowercorrelationswithachievementthan teachers'ratingsofstudents'chancesforacademicachievementifinstructedonlyinEnglish(Ulibarri,Spencer&Rivas,1981).Thisteachervariableaccountedfor 41%ofthevarianceinreadingachievementscoresandtheBINL,BSMandLASaddedonlyzero,oneandfourpercentrespectivelytothepredictionofreading achievement. Apartfromtheissueoftheirrelationshiptoacademicachievement,thevalidityofthesetestscanbequestionedonseveralothergrounds.Forexample,Rosansky (1979)pointsoutthatdataelicitedbytheBSMEnglishwereunrelatedtodataelicitedfromtapednaturalisticconversationofthesameindividuals.TheLASSpanish languageclassificationisreportedtoconsiderablyunderestimatetheSpanishproficiencyofnativeSpanishspeakersasassessedbyeitherteacherratingsordetailed ethnolinguisticanalysisofchildren'sspeechinarangeofsettings(MaceMatluck,1980). Thisbriefsurveyofassessmentissuesinbilingualeducationsuggeststhatamajorreasonfortheconfusedstateoftheartisthatthedevelopmentalrelationships betweenlanguageproficiency(inL1andL2)andacademicperformancehavescarcelybeenconsidered,letaloneresolved.Theconfusionabouttheassessmentof "languageproficiency"isreflectedinthevariedcriteriausedtoexitlanguageminoritystudentsfrombilingualprograms. "EnglishProficiency"andExitCriteria LackofEnglishproficiencyiscommonlyregardedbypolicymakersandeducatorsasthemajorcauseoflanguageminoritystudents'academicfailureinEnglishonly programs.Thus,itisassumedthatstudentsrequirebilingualinstructiononlyuntiltheyhavebecomeproficientinEnglish.Logically,afterstudentshavebecome "proficientinEnglish",anydifficultiestheymightencounterinanEnglishonlyprogramcannotbeattributedtolackofEnglishproficiency. IfwecombinethisapparentlogicwiththefactthatimmigrantstudentsgenerallyappeartoacquireareasonablyhighlevelofL2fluencywithinaboutoneandahalfto twoyearsofarrivalinthehostcountry(Cummins,

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page9

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

inpressSnow&HoefnagelHhle,1978),thenonemightassumethattwoyearsofbilingualeducationshouldbesufficientforstudentstomakethetransitiontoan Englishonlyprogram.Thislineofreasoningisfrequentlyinvokedtojustifyexitingstudentsoutofbilingualprogramsafterarelativelyshortperiod.Itisassumedthat, becausestudentscancopeadequatelywiththecommunicativedemandsoffacetofacesituationsandmayappearquitefluentinEnglish,thereforetheirEnglish proficiencyissufficientlywelldevelopedtocopewiththecommunicativedemandsoftheregularEnglishonlycurriculumonanequalbasiswithnativeEnglishspeaking students. Thereisconsiderableevidencetosuggestthatthislogicisfalse.BilingualprogramswhichhavebeensuccessfulindevelopingahighlevelofEnglishacademicskillsin languageminoritystudentshaveusuallymaintainedinstructioninL1throughoutelementaryschool.Usuallyitisonlyinthelatergradesofelementaryschoolthat studentsapproachgradenormsinEnglishreadingskills(seeCummins,1981a,forareview).Inasimilarway,ithasbeenshown(Cummins,1981b)thatittook immigrantstudentswhoarrivedinCanadaaftertheageofsix,57years,ontheaverage,toapproachgradenormsinacademicallyrelatedaspectsofEnglish proficiency.Thus,itclearlytakesconsiderablylongerforlanguageminoritystudentstodevelopageappropriateacademicskillsinEnglishthanitdoestodevelop certainaspectsofageappropriateEnglishfacetofacecommunicativeskills.Itfollowsthatstudentsexitedonthebasisofteacherjudgementsorlanguagetestswhich primarilyassessfacetofacecommunicativeskillsarelikelytoexperienceconsiderableacademicdifficultyinanEnglishonlyprogram,andmanywillmanifestthe welldocumentedpatternofcumulativedeficits. Thedangersofunanalysednotionsofwhatconstitutes"Englishproficiency"canbeillustratedbyanexamplefromaCanadianstudyinwhichtheteacherreferralforms andpsychologicalassessmentsof428languageminoritystudentswereanalysed(Cummins,inpress).Thisparticularchild(PR)wasfirstreferredingrade1bythe schoolprincipalwhonotedthat:
"PRisexperiencingconsiderabledifficultywithgrade1work.Anintellectualassessmentwouldhelpherteachertosetrealisticlearningexpectationsforherandmightprovide somecluesastoremedialassistancethatmightbeoffered."

Nomentionwasmadeofthechild'sEnglishasasecondlanguage(ESL)backgroundthisonlyemergedwhenthechildwasreferredbythegradetwo

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page10

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

teacherinthefollowingyear.Thus,thepsychologistdoesnotconsiderthisasapossiblefactorinaccountingforthediscrepancybetweenaVerbalIQof64anda PerformanceIQof108.Theassessmentreportreadasfollows:
"Althoughoverallabilitylevelappearstobewithinthelowaveragerange,notethesignificantdifferencebetweenverbalandnonverbalscores....ItwouldappearthatPR's developmenthasnotprogressedatanormalrateandconsequentlysheis,andwillcontinuetoexperiencemuchdifficultyinschool.Teacher'sexpectations(atthistime)shouldbe setaccordingly."

Whatisinterestinginthisexampleisthatthechild'sfacetofacecommunicativeskillsarepresumablysufficientlywelldevelopedthatthepsychologist(andpossibly theteacher)isnotalertedtoherESLbackground.ThisleadsthepsychologisttoinferfromherlowverbalIQscorethat"herdevelopmenthasnotprogressedata normalrate"andtoadvisetheteachertosetlowacademicexpectationsforthechildsinceshe"willcontinuetoexperiencemuchdifficultyinschool".Thereisample evidencefrommanycontexts(e.g.Mercer,1973)ofhowtheattributionofdeficientcognitiveskillstolanguageminoritystudentscanbecomeselffulfilling. Inmanyofthereferralformsandpsychologicalassessmentsanalysedinthisstudythefollowinglineofreasoningwasinvoked:

BecauselanguageminoritystudentsarefluentinEnglish,theirpooracademicperformanceand/ortestscorescannotbeattributedtolackofproficiencyinEnglish.Therefore, thesestudentsmusteitherhavedeficientcognitiveabilitiesorbepoorlymotivated('lazy').

Inasimilarway,whenlanguageminoritystudentsareexitedfrombilingualprogramsonthebasisoffluentEnglishcommunicativeskills,itappearsthattheirsubsequent academicdifficultiescannotlogicallybeattributedto"lackofEnglishproficiency".Thus,educatorsarelikelytoattributethesedifficultiestofactorswithinthestudent suchas"lowacademicability"(IQ). Thesemisconceptionsderivefromthefactthattherelationshipsbetween"languageproficiency"andacademicdevelopmenthavenotbeenadequatelyconsidered, eitheramongnativeEnglishspeakingorlanguageminoritystudents.Intheremainderofthischapteratheoreticalframeworkisdevelopedforconceptualizingthese relationships.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page11

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

ATheoreticalFramework3 Onthebasisoftheforegoinganalysisoftheconfusionswhichexistbothincurrentlanguageproficiencyassessmenttechniquesandinproceduresforexitingstudents frombilingualprograms,threeminimalrequirementsforatheoreticalframeworkoflanguageproficiencyrelevanttobilingualeducationintheUnitedStatescanbe outlined:First,suchaframeworkmustincorporateadevelopmentalperspectivesuchthatthoseaspectsoflanguageproficiencywhicharemasteredearlybynative speakersandL2learnerscanbedistinguishedfromthosethatcontinuetovaryacrossindividualsasdevelopmentprogressesSecond,theframeworkmustbecapable ofallowingdifferencesbetweenthelinguisticdemandsoftheschoolandthoseofinterpersonalcontextsoutsidetheschooltobedescribedThird,theframeworkmust becapableofallowingthedevelopmentalrelationshipsbetweenL1andL2proficiencytobedescribed. Currenttheoreticalframeworksof''communicativecompetence"(e.g.Canale&Swain,1980Canale,1981)donotandwerenotintendedtomeetthese requirements.Canale(1981)distinguishesgrammatical,sociolinguistic,discourseandstrategiccompetenciesbutstatesthattheirrelationshipswitheachotherandwith knowledgeoftheworldandacademicachievementisanempiricalquestionyettobeaddressed.Althoughthisframeworkisextremelyusefulforsomepurposes,its applicabilitytobilingualeducationislimitedbyitsstaticnondevelopmentalnatureandbythefactthattherelationshipsbetweenacademicperformanceandthe componentsofcommunicativecompetenceinL1andL2arenotconsidered.Forexample,bothpronunciationandlexicalknowledgewouldbothbeclassifiedunder grammaticalcompetence.Yet,L1pronunciationismasteredveryearlybynativespeakers,whereaslexicalknowledgecontinuestodevelopthroughoutschoolingand isstronglyrelatedtoacademicperformance. Theframeworkoutlinedbelowisanattempttoconceptualize"languageproficiency"insuchawaythatthedevelopmentalinterrelationshipsbetweenacademic performanceandlanguageproficiencyinbothL1andL2canbeconsidered.Itisproposedonlyinrelationtothedevelopmentofacademicskillsinbilingualeducation andisnotnecessarilyappropriateorapplicabletoothercontextsorissues.Essentially,theframeworktriestointegratetheearlierdistinctionbetweenbasic interpersonalcommunicativeskills(BICS)andcognitive/academiclanguageproficiency(CALP)intoamoregeneraltheoreticalmodel.TheBICSCALPdistinction wasintendedtomakethesamepointthatwasmadeearlierinthispaper,namely,academicdeficitsareoftencreatedbyteachersandpsychologistswhofailtorealize thatittakeslanguageminoritystudentsconsiderablylongertoattain

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page12

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

grade/ageappropriatelevelsinEnglishacademicskillsthanitdoesinEnglishfacetofacecommunicativeskills.However,asispointedoutinotherpapersinthis volume,suchadichotomyoversimplifiesthephenomenaandrisksmisinterpretation.ItisalsodifficulttodiscussthecrucialdevelopmentalissuesintermsoftheBICS CALPdichotomy. TheframeworkpresentedinFigure1proposesthatinthecontextofbilingualeducationintheUnitedStates"languageproficiency"canbeconceptualizedalongtwo continuums.Thefirstisacontinuumrelatingto

FIGURE1 RangeofContextualSupportandDegreeofCognitiveInvolvementin CommunicativeActivities.

therangeofcontextualsupportavailableforexpressingorreceivingmeaning.Theextremesofthiscontinuumaredescribedintermsof"contextembedded"versus "contextreduced"communication.Theyaredistinguishedbythefactthatincontextembeddedcommunicationtheparticpantscanactivelynegotiatemeaning(e.g.by providingfeedbackthatthemessagehasnotbeenunderstood)andthelanguageissupportedbyawiderangeofmeaningfulparalinguisticandsituationalcues. Contextreducedcommunication,ontheotherhandreliesprimarily(orattheextremeofthecontinuum,exclusively)onlinguisticcuestomeaningandmayinsome casesinvolvesuspendingknowledgeofthe''realworld"inordertointerpret(ormanipulate)thelogicofthecommunicationappropriately.4 Ingeneral,contextembeddedcommunicationderivesfrominterpersonalinvolvementinasharedrealitywhichobviatestheneedforexplicitlinguisticelaborationofthe message.Contextreducedcommunication,ontheotherhand,derivesfromthefactthatthissharedrealitycannotbe

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page13

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

assumed,andthuslinguisticmessagesmustbeelaboratedpreciselyandexplicitlysothattheriskofmisinterpretationisminimized.Itisimportanttoemphasizethatthis isacontinuumandnotadichotomy.Thus,examplesofcommunicativebehaviorsgoingfromlefttorightalongthecontinuummightbe:engaginginadiscussion,writing alettertoaclosefriend,writing(orreading)anacademicarticle.Clearly,contextembeddedcommunicationismoretypicaloftheeverydayworldoutsidethe classroom,whereasmanyofthelinguisticdemandsoftheclassroomreflectcommunicationwhichisclosertothecontextreducedendofthecontinuum. Theverticalcontinuumisintendedtoaddressthedevelopmentalaspectsofcommunicativeproficiencyintermsofthedegreeofactivecognitiveinvolvementinthetask oractivity.Cognitiveinvolvementcanveconceptualizedintermsoftheamountofinformationthatmustbeprocessedsimultaneouslyorinclosesuccessionbythe individualinordertocarryouttheactivity. Howdoesthiscontinuumincorporateadevelopmentalperspective?Ifwereturntothefourcomponentsofcommunicativecompetence(grammatical,sociolinguistic, discourse,andstrategic)discussedbyCanale(1981)itisclearthatwithineachone,somesubskills(e.g.pronunciationandsyntaxwithinL1grammaticalcompetence) reachplateaulevelsatwhichtherearenolongersignificantdifferencesinmasterybetweenindividuals(atleastincontextembeddedsituations).Othersubskills continuetodevelopthroughouttheschoolyearsandbeyond,dependingupontheindividual'scommunicativeneedsinparticularculturalandinstitutionalmilieux. Thus,theupperpartsoftheverticalcontinuumconsistofcommunicativetasksandactivitiesinwhichthelinguistictoolshavebecomelargelyautomatized(mastered) andthusrequirelittleactivecognitiveinvolvementforappropriateperformance.Atthelowerendofthecontinuumaretasksandactivitiesinwhichthecommunicative toolshavenotbecomeautomatizedandthusrequireactivecognitiveinvolvement.Persuadinganotherindividualthatyourpointofviewratherthanher/hisiscorrect,or writinganessayonacomplexthemeareexamplesofsuchactivities.Inthesesituations,itisnecessarytostretchone'slinguisticresources(i.e.grammatical, sociolinguistic,discourseandstrategiccompetences)tothelimitinordertoachieveone'scommunicativegoals.Obviously,cognitiveinvolvement,inthesenseof amountofinformationprocessing,canbejustasintenseincontextembeddedasincontextreducedactivities. Asmasteryisdeveloped,specificlinguistictasksandskillstravelfromthebottomtowardsthetopoftheverticalcontinuum.Inotherwords,theretendstobeahigh levelofcognitiveinvolvementintaskoractivity

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page14

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

performanceuntilmasteryhasbeenachievedor,alternatively,untilaplateaulevelatlessthanmasterylevelshasbeenreached(e.g.L2pronunciationinmanyadult immigrants,"fossilization"ofcertaingrammaticalfeaturesamongFrenchimmersionstudents,etc.).Thus,learningthephonologyandsyntaxofL1,forexample, requiresconsiderablecognitiveinvolvementforthetwoandthreeyearoldchild,andthereforethesetaskswouldbeplacedinquadrantB(contextembedded, cognitivelydemanding).However,asmasteryoftheseskillsdevelops,tasksinvolvingthemwouldmovefromquadrantBtoquadrantAsinceperformancebecomes increasinglyautomatizedandcognitivelyundemanding.Inasecondlanguagecontextthesametypeofdevelopmentalprogressionoccurs. ThethirdrequirementforatheoreticalframeworkapplicabletobilingualeducationisthatitpermitsthedevelopmentalinterrelationshipsbetweenL1andL2 proficiencytobeconceptualized.ThereisconsiderableevidencethatL1andL2proficiencyareinterdependent,i.e.manifestationsofacommonunderlying proficiency(seeCummins,1981a).Theevidencereviewedinsupportoftheinterdependencehypothesisprimarilyinvolvedacademicor"contextreduced"language proficiencybecausethehypothesiswasdevelopedexplicitlyinrelationtothedevelopmentofbilingualacademicskills.However,anylanguagetaskwhichis cognitivelydemandingforagroupofindividualsislikelytoshowamoderatedegreeofinterdependenceacrosslanguages.Also,otherfactors(e.g.personality, learningstyle,etc.),inadditiontogeneralcognitiveskills,arelikelytocontributetotherelationshipbetweenL1andL2andthussomecognitivelyundemanding aspectsofproficiency(e.g.fluency)mayalsoberelatedacrosslanguages. Asfarascontextreducedlanguageproficiencyisconcerned,thetransferabilityacrosslanguagesofmanyoftheproficienciesinvolvedinreading(e.g.inferringand predictingmeaningbasedonsamplingfromthetext)andwriting(e.g.planninglargesectionsofdiscourse)isobvious.However,evenwherethetaskdemandsare languagespecific(e.g.decodingorspelling)astrongrelationshipmaybeobtainedbetweenskillsinL1andL2asaresultofamoregeneralizedproficiency(and motivation)tohandlecognitivelydemandingcontextreducedlanguagetasks.Similarly,onthecontextembeddedside,manysociolinguisticrulesoffacetoface communicationarelanguagespecific,butL1andL2sociolinguisticskillsmayberelatedasaresultofapossiblegeneralizedsensitivitytosociolinguisticrulesof discourse. Inconclusion,thetheoreticalframeworkappearstopermitthecomplexityofL1L2relationshipstobeconceptualizedatthesametimeasit

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page15

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

providesamoreadequaterationalefortheessentiallysimplepointthatacademicskillsinL1andL2areinterdependent.Theframeworkalsoprovidesthebasisfora taskanalysisofmeasuresof"languageproficiency"whichwouldallowtherelationshipsbetweenlanguagemeasuresandacademicperformancetobepredictedfor anyparticulargroupofindividuals.Ingeneral,themorecontextreducedandcognitivelydemandingthelanguagetask,themoreitwillberelatedtoachievement. However,althoughthereareintrinsiccharacteristicsofsomelanguagetaskswhichmakethemmorecognitivelydemandingandcontextreduced,thesetask characteristicsmustbeconsideredinconjunctionwiththecharacteristicsoftheparticularlanguageusers(e.g.L1and/orL2proficiency,learningstyle,etc.).For example,skillsthathavebecomeautomatizedfornativespeakersofalanguagemayverywellbehighlycognitivelydemandingforlearnersofthatlanguageasanL2. Thus,onewouldexpectdifferentrelationshipsbetweenachievementandcertainlanguagetasksinanL1ascomparedtoanL2context.5 AssessmentofEntryandExitCriteriaRevisited Thetheoreticalframeworkcanreadilybeappliedtotheissueoftheassessmentofentryandexitcriteria.Theproblemhighlightedearlierwasthatlanguageminority studentsoftenmanifestproficienciesinsomecontextembeddedaspectsofEnglish(quadrantA)andare,consequently,regardedashavingsufficient"English proficiency"bothtofollowaregularEnglishcurriculumandtotakepsychologicalandeducationaltestsinEnglish.Whatisnotrealizedbymanyeducatorsisthat becauseoflanguageminoritystudents'ESLbackground,theregularEnglishcurriculumandpsychologicalassessmentproceduresareconsiderablymorecontext reducedandcognitivelydemandingthantheyareforEnglishbackgroundstudents.Inotherwords,students'Englishproficiencymaynotbesufficientlydevelopedto copewithcommunicativedemandswhichareverydifferentfromthoseoffacetofacesituations. Whatassessmentproceduresshouldbeusedforentryandexitinbilingualprograms?Giventhatthepurposeoflanguageproficiencyassessmentinbilingualeducation isplacementofstudentsinclassestaughtthroughthelanguagewhich,itisassumed,willbestpromotethedevelopmentofacademicskills,itisnecessarythatthe proceduresassessproficienciesrelatedtothecommunicativedemandsofschooling.However,inordertobevalid,theproceduresshouldalsoreflectchildren's previousexperiencewithlanguage.Becausethechild'slanguageexperiencespriorto

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page16

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

schoolhavebeenlargelyincontextembeddedsituations,theassessmentproceduresforentrypurposesshouldinvolvecognitivelydemandingcontextembedded measureswhicharefairtothevarietyofL1(andL2)spokenbythechild.However,forexitpurposes,itisrecommendedthatcognitivelydemandingcontextreduced measuresbeusedbecausethesemoreaccuratelyreflectthecommunicativedemandsofanallEnglishclassroom.Ifchildrenareunabletohandlethecontextreduced demandsofanEnglishtest,thereislittlereasontobelievethattheyhavedevelopedsufficient"Englishproficiency"tocompeteonanequalbasiswithnativeEnglish speakingchildreninaregularEnglishclassroom. Thesesuggestionsderivefromatheoreticalanalysisoftherelationshipsbetweenlanguageproficiencyandacademicperformanceandclearlyrequireempirical confirmation.However,withoutatheoreticalframeworkforconceptualizingtheserelationships,legitimateempiricalquestionscannotevenbeasked.Anexampleofa commonlyposedempiricalquestionwhichisessentiallymeaninglesswhenaskedinatheoreticalvacuumistheissueoftherelationshipbetween"orallanguage proficiency"andreading.Withinthecontextofthepresentframework"orallanguageproficiency"couldequallyrefertocognitivelyundemandingcontextembedded skillsastocognitivelydemandingcontextreducedskills.Asonewouldexpectonthebasisofthepresentanalysis,thereislittlerelationshipbetweenthesetwo aspectsof"orallanguageproficiency".Also,readingskillsarestronglyrelatedtothelatter,butunrelatedtotheformer(seee.g.Cummins,1981a). Insummary,themajorreasonsfortheconfusioninregardtoassessmentproceduresforentryandexitcriteriainbilingualeducationisthatneithertheconstructof languageproficiencyitself,noritsrelationshiptothedevelopmentofcognitiveandacademicskillshasbeenadequatelyconceptualized.Theextremepositionsthat(1) languageproficiencyisessentiallyindependentofcognitiveandacademicskills,impliedbysomesociolinguistsonthebasisofethnographicallyorientedresearchand (2)languageproficiencyislargelyindistinguishablefromcognitiveandacademicskills,suggestedbymuchofthepsychometricresearchreviewedbyOllerandhis colleagues,botharbitrarilyidentifyparticularaspectsoftheconstructoflanguageproficiencywiththetotalityoftheconstruct.Inthepresentpaperithasbeenargued thatlanguageproficiencycannotbeconceptualizedasonestaticentityoras64staticentities.Itisconstantlydevelopingalongdifferentdimensions(e.g.grammatical, sociolinguistic,discourseandstrategicdimensions)andbeingspecializedfordifferentcontextsofuseamongmonolingualEnglishspeakingaswellaslanguageminority children.Inacademiccontexts,certainaspectsoflanguageproficiencydevelopinspecializedwaystobecomethemajortoolfor

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page17

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

meetingthecognitiveandcommunicativedemandsofschooling. Amajorimplicationofthepresentframeworkisthatrecognitionoftheverydifferentcommunicativeproficienciesrequiredofchildreninschoolencountersas comparedtotheonetoone,facetofaceinteractiontypicalofoutofschoolcontextsisafirststeptowardsthedevelopmentoftheoreticallyandempiricallyviable entryandexitprocedures. Notes 1.TheneedforatheoreticalframeworkexplicitlydesignedtorelatelanguageproficiencytoacademicachievementwasbroughthometomeattheLanguage ProficiencyAssessmentSymposium(LPAS)notonlyasaresultofcriticismsofthedistinctionwhichIhadintroducedbetweenbasicinterpersonalcommunicative skills(BICS)andcognitive/academiclanguageproficiency(CALP)but,moreimportantly,bythelackofanyresolutionoftheissuestowhichthatdistinctionwas addressed.Thepresenttheoreticalframeworkisessentiallyanelaborationand,hopefully,aclarificationoftheBICSCALPdistinction.Inadditiontothemany participantsattheLPASwhomadevaluablesuggestions,IwouldliketoacknowledgemydebttoJohnOllerJr.andtoMerrillSwainformanyusefuldiscussionson theseissues. 2.MuchofthevehemencewithwhichresearchershaverejectedtheverbalcomponentsofstandardizedIQandachievementtestsasvalidmeasuresofeither "languageproficiency"orcognitiveabilitiesstemsfromtheblatantmisuseofsuchmeasureswithlowsocioeconomicstatus(SES)andethnicminoritystudents(seefor example,Cummins,1980a).However,thefactthatSESorculturaldifferencesonsuchmeasurescanbeexplainedbyacculturationtomiddleclassmajoritygroup normsdoesnotaccountfordifferencesbetweenindividualswithinSESorculturalgroupsoncognitivelydemandingculturespecificmeasuresofproficiency.Inother words,itislogicallyinvalidtoarguethataparticularphenomenon(e.g.cognitivedevelopment)doesnotexistbecausesomeofthetoolsusedtomeasurethat phenomenon(e.g.IQtests)havebeenabused. 3.Thistheoreticalframeworkshouldbeviewedwithinasocialcontext.Thelanguageproficienciesdescribeddevelopasaresultofvarioustypesofcommunicative interactionsinhomeandschool(seee.g.Wells,1981).Thenatureoftheseinteractionsis,inturn,determinedbybroadersocietalfactors(seeCummins,1981a).In ordertoemphasizethesocialnatureof"languageproficiency",thistermwillbeusedinterchangeablywith"communicativeproficiency"indescribingtheframework. 4.Theterm"contextreduced"isusedratherthan"disembedded"(Donaldson1978)or"decontextualized"becausethereisalargevarietyofcontextualcuesavailable tocarryouttasksevenatthecontextreducedendofthecontinuum.Thedifference,however,isthatthesecuesareexclusivelylinguisticinnature. 5.Itshouldbepointedoutthattheframeworkinnowayimpliesthatlanguagepedagogyshouldbecontextreduced.Thereisconsiderableevidencefrombothfirst andsecondlanguagepedagogy(e.g.Smith,1978Swain,1978)tosupporttheprinciplethatcontextreducedlanguageproficiencycanbemostsuccessfully developedonthebasisofinitialinstructionwhichmaximizesthedegreeof

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page18

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

contextembeddedness.Inotherwords,themoreinstructionisintunewiththeexperienceandskillsthechildbringstoschool(i.e.themoremeaningfulitis),the morelearningwilloccur.Thisisoneofthereasonswhybilingualeducationis,ingeneral,moresuccessfulforlanguageminoritystudentsthanEnglishonly programs. References Burt,M.,Dulay,H.&HernandezChavez,E.1975,Bilingualsyntaxmeasure.NewYork:Harcourt,Brace,Jovanovitch. Canale,M.1981,Fromcommunicativecompetencetocommunicativelanguagepedagogy.InJ.Richards&R.Schmidt(eds),Languageandcommunication. Manuscriptsubmittedforpublication. Canale,M.,&Swain,M.1980,Theoreticalbasesofcommunicativeapproachestosecondlanguageteachingandtesting.AppliedLinguistics,1(1),147. Cazden,C.,Bond,J.,Epstein,A.,Matz,R.&Savignon,J.1977,Languageassessment:Where,whatandhow.AnthropologyandEducationQuarterly,8(2),83 91. Cervenka,E.J.1972,BasicLanguageCompetenceBattery,NewYork:E.J.Cervenka. Cummins,J.1976,Theinfluenceofbilingualismoncognitivegrowth:Asynthesisofresearchfindingsandexplanatoryhypotheses.WorkingPapersonBilingualism, 9,143. .1978,Educationalimplicationsofmothertonguemaintenanceinminoritylanguagegroups.TheCanadianModernLanguageReview,34,395416. .1979,Linguisticinterdependenceandtheeducationaldevelopmentofbilingualchildren.ReviewofEducationalResearch,49(2),22251. .1980a,Thecrosslingualdimensionsoflanguageproficiency:Implicationsforbilingualeducationandtheoptimalageissue.TESOLQuarterly,14,17587. .1980b,Theentryandexitfallacyinbilingualeducation.NABEJournal,4(3),2560. .1981a,Theroleofprimarylanguagedevelopmentinpromotingeducationalsuccessforlanguageminoritystudents.InCaliforniaStateDepartmentof Education,Schoolingandlanguageminoritystudents:Atheoreticalframework,LosAngeles:Evaluation,DisseminationandAssessmentCenter. .1981b,AgeonarrivalandimmigrantsecondlanguagelearninginCanada:Areassessment.AppliedLinguistics,2(2),13249. .inpress,Bilingualismandspecialeducation:Issuesinassessmentandpedagogy.Clevedon,Avon:MultilingualMatters. DeAvila,E.A.&Duncan,S.E.1977,LanguageassessmentscalesLASI&II(2nded.).CorteMadera,CA:LinguametricsGroup,Inc. .1978,Afewthoughtsaboutlanguageassessment:TheLAUdecisionreconsidered.BilingualEducationPaperSeries,NationalDisseminationand AssessmentCenter,1(8). Dieterich,T.G.,Freeman,C.&Crandall,J.A.1979,AlinguisticanalysisofsomeEnglishproficiencytests.TESOLQuarterly,13(4),53550. Donaldson,M.1978,Children'sminds.NewYork:Norton. Duncan,S.E.&DeAvila,E.A.1979,Bilingualismandcognition:Somerecentfindings.NABEJournal,4(1),1550. Herbert,C.H.1977,Basicinventoryofnaturallanguage(BINL).SanBernadino,CA:CheckpointSystems.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137

Page19

Copyright 1984. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

HernandezChavez,E.,Burt,M.&Dulay,H.1978,Languagedominanceandproficiencytesting:Somegeneralconsiderations.NABEJournal,3,4154. Kessler,C.&Quinn,M.E.1980,Positiveeffectsofbilingualismonscienceproblemsolvingabilities.InJ.E.Atlatis(ed.),31stAnnualGeorgetownUniversity RoundTableonLanguagesandLinguistics.Washington,D.C.:GeorgetownUniversityPress. Labov,W.1969,ThestudyofnonstandardEnglish.Champaign,Illinois:NationalCouncilofTeachersofEnglish. MaceMatluck,B.J.1980,AlongitudinalstudyoftheorallanguagedevelopmentofTexasbilingualchildren(SpanishEnglish):Findingsfromthefirst year.PaperpresentedattheNationalConferenceintheLanguageArtsintheElementarySchool,SanAntonio,Texas.March. Mercer,J.1973,Labellingthementallyretarded.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1973. Oakland,T.1977,Psychologicalandeducationalassessmentofminoritychildren.NewYork:Brunner/Mazel. Oller,Jr.,J.W.,1981,Languagetestingresearch(197980).InR.Kaplan,R.L.Jones&G.R.Tucker(eds),AnnualReviewofAppliedLinguistics.VolumeI. Rowley,Mass:NewburyHouse. Oller,Jr.,J.W.&Perkins,K.1980.Researchinlanguagetesting.Rowley,Mass.:NewburyHouse. Rosansky,E.J.1979,Reviewofthebilingualsyntaxmeasure.InB.Spolsky(ed.),Somemajortests:Advancesinlanguagetesting:Series:1.Arlington,VA: CenterforAppliedLinguistics. .1981,Futureperspectivesonresearchinorallanguageproficiencyassessment.PaperpresentedattheInterAmericaSymposiumonLanguage ProficiencyAssessment,AirlieHouse,Virginia,March. Shuy,R.W.1979,Ontherelevanceofrecentdevelopmentsinsociolinguisticstothestudyoflanguagelearningandearlyeducation.NABEJournal,4,5171. SkutnabbKangas,T.&Toukomaa,P.1976,Teachingmigrantchildren'smothertongueandlearningthelanguageofthehostcountryinthecontextofthe socioculturalsituationofthemigrantfamily.Tampere,Finland:UniversityofTampere.(DepartmentofSociologyandSocialPsychologyResearchReport,15, Box601.) Smith,F.1978,Understandingreading(2nded.).NewYork:Holt,RinehartandWinston. Snow,C.E.&HoefnagelHhle,M.1978,Thecriticalperiodforlanguageacquisition:Evidencefromsecondlanguagelearning.ChildDevelopment,49,1114 1128. Swain,M.1978,Frenchimmersion:Early,lateorpartial?TheCanadianModernLanguageReview,34,57785. Toukomaa,P.&SkutnabbKangas,T.1977,Theintensiveteachingofthemothertonguetomigrantchildrenofpreschoolageandchildreninthelower levelofcomprehensiveschool.Tampere,Finland:UniversityofTampere.(DepartmentofSociologyandSocialPsychologyResearchReport,15,Box601.) Ulibarri,D.,Spencer,M.&Rivas,G.1981,LanguageProficiencyandAcademicAchievement:Astudyoflanguageproficiencytestsandtheirrelationshiptoschool ratingsaspredictorsofacademicachievement.NABEJournal5,4780. Wells,G.1981,Learningthroughinteraction:Thestudyoflanguagedevelopment.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 4/7/2012 4:21 AM via NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIV 9780585254081 ; Rivera, Charlene.; Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement Account: s3598137