REPBLICA DE ANGOLA

MINISTRIO DO ENSINO SUPERIOR

INSTITUTO SUPERIOR DE CINCIAS DE EDUCAO
ISCED-HULA
DEPARTAMENTO DE LETRAS MODERNAS
SECO DE INGLS

TTULO: The Use of Code-Switching in 8th Grade Classes

to Facilitate the Teaching and Learning of English
at Escola do I do Ciclo do Ensino Secundrio
n76 Mandume in Lubango

AUTOR: DOMINGOS CAPITA GAVINO SACHISSOQUELE

Lubango

2017
 INSTITUTO SUPERIOR DE CINCIAS DE EDUCAO
ISCED-HULA
DEPARTAMENTO DE LETRAS MODERNAS
SECO DE INGLS
TTULO:
The use Code-Switching in 8th grade classes to Facilitate
the Teaching and Learning of English at Escola do I Ciclo
do Ensino Secundrio n 76 Mandume in Lubango

Trabalho de Fim de Curso para a Obteno do Grau de

Licenciado no Ensino de Ingls
Curso: Lingustica/Ingls

Autor: DOMINGOS CAPITA GAVINO SACHISSOQUELE

Tutor: JOAQUIM SAPALO CASTILHO CACUMBA

Lubango, Outubro, 2017

CONTENTS PAGE
 CONTENTS PAGE
DEDICATION ..................................................................................................... vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................................................................................. vii
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................... viii
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ ix
CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................... 1
1.0. Introduction........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1. Historical Overview of ELT methods ............................................................................. 3
1.1.1. Methods against code switching ....................................................................... 4
1.1.1.1. Direct Method ......................................................................................... 4
1.1.1.2. Audio-lingual Method ............................................................................ 5
1.1.1.3. Total Physical Response (TPR) .......................................................... 6
1.1.1.4. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)....................................... 6
1.1.1.5. Task Based Approach (TBA) ............................................................... 8
1.1.1.6. Content Based Instruction (CBI) ........................................................ 8
1.1.2. Methods in favor of code switching .................................................................. 9
1.1.2.1. Grammar Translation Method.............................................................. 9
1.1.2.2. Silent Way............................................................................................... 9
1.1.2.3. Desuggestopedia................................................................................. 11
1.1.2.4. Community Language Learning ........................................................ 12
1.2. Issues and debates about code switching in the English language classroom .... 13
1.2.1. Arguments against code switching ................................................................. 13
1.2.2. Arguments for code switching ......................................................................... 15
1.3. Useful Applications of code-switching in the classroom .......................................... 16
1.4. Functions of Code Switching Empirical studies ......................................................... 18
1.4.1. Functions of code switching according to pupils .......................................... 18
1.4.2. Functions of code switching according to teachers ..................................... 19
1.5. Attitudes towards code switching in the classroom: Empirical studies .................. 20
1.5.1. Attitudes towards code-witching according to pupils ................................... 20
1.5.2. Attitudes towards code switching according to teachers............................. 21
1.6. Factors that govern teachers decisions regarding code-switching......................... 22
1.7. Strategies teachers should use to avoid pupils overuse of code-switching ......... 24
CHAPTER TWO: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................ 29

iii
2.0. Introduction...................................................................................................................... 29
2.1. Methodology.................................................................................................................... 29
2.2. Context of the Research ............................................................................................... 31
2.3. Participants...................................................................................................................... 31
2.4. Period of Study ............................................................................................................... 32
2.5. Methods ........................................................................................................................... 32
2.5.1. Student questionnaire Survey ......................................................................... 34
2.5.1.1. Design of the questionnaire survey ................................................. 34
2.5.1.2. Piloted Questionnaire......................................................................... 34
2.5.1.3. Final Questionnaire ............................................................................ 34
2.5.1.4. Procedures .......................................................................................... 35
2.5.2. Teacher Questionnaire ..................................................................................... 36
2.5.3. Teacher Interview .............................................................................................. 36
2.5.3.1. Procedures .......................................................................................... 37
2.5.4. Classroom observation ..................................................................................... 37
2.5.4.1. Pilot observation ................................................................................. 37
2.5.4.2. Final Observation chart...................................................................... 37
2.5.4.3. Procedures .......................................................................................... 38
2.6. Results ............................................................................................................................. 38
2.6.1. Questionnaire .........................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.6.1.1. Pupils Background information ........................................................ 38
2.6.1.2. Teachers Background information .................................................. 39
2.6.1.3. Functions of code switching .............................................................. 41
2.6.1.3.1. Results from pupil questionnaire .................................... 41
2.6.1.3.2. Results from pupil classroom observation .................... 43
2.6.1.3.3. Results from the teacher questionnaire......................... 42
2.6.2. Results from the semi-structured interview ................................................... 42
2.6.3. Results from the classroom observation........................................................ 44
2.6.4. Attitudes towards code switching .................................................................... 47
2.6.4.1. Results from pupils questionnaire ..................................................... 47
2.6.4.2. Results from the teacher questionnaire ........................................... 49
2.6.4.3. Results from the semi-structured interview ..................................... 51
2.6.5. Factors that govern teachers decisions regarding code-switching use ... 52
2.6.5.1. Results from the questionnaire.......................................................... 52

iv
 2.6.5.2. Results from the semi-structured interview .................................... 52
2.6.6. Strategies that teachers should use to avoid pupils overuse of code-
switching ............................................................................................................. 53
2.6.6.1. Results from the questionnaire.......................................................... 53
2.6.6.2. Results from the semi-structured interview ..................................... 54
2.7. Limitations and Delimitations of the study .................................................................. 54
2.7.1. Limitations...............................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.7.2. Delimitations ....................................................................................................... 55
CHAPTER THREE: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ........................................ 58
3.0. Introduction...................................................................................................................... 58
3.1. Functions of code-switching ......................................................................................... 58
3.1.1. Functions of code switching according to pupils .......................................... 58
3.1.2. Functions of code switching according to teachers ..................................... 59
3.2. Attitudes towards code switching................................................................................. 60
3.2.1. Attitudes towards code switching according to pupils ................................. 60
3.2.2. Attitudes towards code switching according to teachers............................. 63
3.3. Factors that govern teachers decision regarding code-switching in classroom .. 66
3.4. Strategies that teachers should use to avoid pupils overuse of code-switching . 67
3.5. Significance of the study to the teaching/learning context ....................................... 67
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 71
APPENDICES .................................................................................................. 75
APPENDIX A. Questionrio para os alunos ..................................................... 75
APPENDIX B. Pupil questionnaire (english version) ........................................ 77
APPENDIX C. Teacher questionnaire .............................................................. 79
APPENDIX D. Semi-structured interview questions ......................................... 82
APPENDIX E. Classroom observation chart on the use of code-switching in
classroom................................................................................................... 83
APPENDIX F. Strategies teachers should use to avoid pupils overuse of code-
switching .................................................................................................... 84
APPENDIX G. Useful applications of code-switching in classroom .................. 85
APPENDIX H. Example of a lesson plancode-switching interaction ............. 86
REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 90
DECLARAO................................................................................................. 95

v
DEDICATION
 DEDICATION
To my loving parents Agostinho Sachissoquele and Angelina Generosa
Helena Lofa my supporters, ever-present help. Vos amo muito

To my brothers and sisters my co-heirs of life and my inspiration. Vos

amo muito

To my cousin Jacob Capaia my inspiration. You had a very positive

influence in my life. Sou-lhe muito grato por tudo

To my sweetheart Preciosa my life partner. You are the joy of my life.

Love you! Te amo beb.

vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost I would like to address my deepest gratitude to the Lord, God
Almighty for granting me life, health, strength, protection and every other
blessing Ive been enjoying throughout my life despite the many difficult times I
have been through. He has been with me throughout my life and during my
academic years and the process of writing the present work. I owe him
everything.

Second, I would like to extend a word of gratitude to Professor Joaquim Sapalo

Castilho Cacumba for being my teacher of Academic Reading Skills and MIC II
which served as a ladder to take me throughout this work. I would also like to
thank him for the honor of accepting to be my tutor and supervisor. Thirdly, for
his support, guidance, expertise, patience and resources he placed at my
disposal throughout the process of writing this academic paper. Thanks a lot for
everything. May the God of all creation grant you loads of blessings and keep
guiding you throughout the rest of your life

Third, my sincerest appreciation goes to all the teachers and trainers in the
English sector who have contributed a lot to my professional training by
equipping me with academic and scientific knowledge that have taken me to
where I am today academically, namely Professor Castilho Cacumba, Professor
Abias Francisco (in memory), Professor Dlcio Twehuanda, Professor Lizandra
Cacumba, professor Snia Roque, Professor Patricia de Jesus and Professor
Carlos Afonso.

Fourth, my heartfelt gratitude goes to my family. To my parents Agostinho

Sachissoquele and Angelina Lofa for their care and support throughout my
academic endeavor. Thanks also to my brothers and sisters for their passive or
active contribution to this paper, especially my little brother Jorge who assisted
me countless times with his computer when mine was broken down, without
forgetting my sweetheart Preciosa for her patience and encouragement and my
cousin Jacob Capaia who made it possible for me to learn English before I
entered ISCED, for his financial support.

Fifth, I also would like to express my deepest appreciation to the principals,

teachers and pupils from Escola Mandume for welcoming me to their school in
order to conduct my research. My gratefulness goes to the director of the school
for permitting to carry out this project in their school and to teachers and pupils
who have dispensed their time to participate in this project. Without their
participation and/or collaboration this project would not have been completed

Finally my gratitude is extended to my colleagues and friends for their direct

and indirect contribution for the completion of this research paper, especially,
Graciano (Jack), Carelgio (Dicken), Kito, my best buddy, Oswald and all others
I could not mention.

vii
ABSTRACT
 ABSTRACT
This study aimed at exploring the use of code-switching at Escola do I Ciclo
do Ensino Secundrio n 76 Mandume. Code-switching tends to be viewed
with suspicion in English Language classes. That is, as it has no or should not
have any place in the teaching of English Language because it may lead pupils
to overdependence on it and thus hinder their learning. As a consequence,
translation and transfer of L1 knowledge to the L2, which is needed for the
acquisition of a second or foreign language, becomes impossible and teaching
less effective. The study addresses pupils and teachers functions of and
attitudes towards code-switching, the factors that govern teachers decisions
regarding code-switching and the strategies teachers use to overcome pupils
overuse of code-switching. Questionnaires, semi-structured interview and
classroom observations were administered to 79 8th grade pupils and 5 8th
grade teachers. The findings indicated that both pupils and teachers use code-
switching but not in every occasion (especially teachers) and most of them
tend towards an overall positive opinion of code-switching, however with some
reservations. There seems to be some factors teachers take into account in
their decisions regarding code-switching and some strategies to overcome
pupils overuse of it. We also suggest strategies to avoid overuse of code-
switching and some useful applications of code-switching in classroom and a
lesson plan to show how it can work. Our main conclusion was that code-
switching is an unavoidable and valuable teaching and learning tool in the L2
classroom which teachers need not avoid due to its negative implications, but
be aware of when (and how) to use it.

Key words: Code switching; Functions; Attitudes; Strategies; Second

language; Foreign language; First language (L1)

viii
INTRODUCTION
 INTRODUCTION
The present study aims at exploring the use of code-switching at Escola do I
Ciclo do Ensino Secundrio n 76 Mandume. It was in the 1980s that code-
switching received attention as specific phenomenon and strategy used by
foreign language teachers. From that time the hot debate of whether switching
back and forth from one language to another (the target language and the
native language) in the foreign language was beneficial or detrimental (Jingxia
2010). Scholars such as Chaudron, 1988; Ellis, 1984; Lightbown, 2001; Wong-
Filmore as cited in Jingxia, 2010) advocated an exclusive target foreign
language teaching arguing that switching to L1 will cause negative transfer in
EFL learning, opposed to Tikunoff and Vazquez-Faria, 1982; Levine 2003 as
cited in Jingxia 2010 among others) who see code-switching as deserving a
place in the EFL classroom being an efficiency strategy in EFL teaching. This
has still now been a topic of great interest and debate among researchers and
teachers like who have sought to investigate it (see for example Gulzar, 2010;
Jakobson, 2012; Kim and Petraki, 2009; Magid and Mughadam, 2013; Sali
2014; Selamat 2014; Yataanbaba and Yiridin, 2015 among others) for this
reason it is also relevant to us today as teachers and pupils.

It is on the basis of this debate that our study has birthed. During my T.P
sessions in my third year at ISCED-Huila, I have noticed that Code switching
tends to be viewed with suspicion in English Language classes at Escola do I
Ciclo do Ensino Secundrio n 76 Mandume. That is, as it has no or should not
have any place in the teaching of English Language because it may lead pupils
to overdependence on it and thus hinder their learning. As a consequence (1)
Adopting L2 exclusivity instruction makes both the linkage of words and
thoughts, and making meaning acquisition in L2 become slow. That is, it
becomes almost impossible for the great amount of thoughts, ideas and beliefs
acquired during first language acquisition to be both translated and transferred
to the L2 (Blackman 2014) , which is required for its learning (Cook, 2001) and
(2) It Unnecessarily deprives learners and teachers of an important tool for
language learning and teaching (Macaro, 2001 as cited in Blackman 2014,
p.13), thus making its exclusion in classroom contexts to be almost certainly to
teach with less than maximum efficiency (Atkinson, 1987, p. 247, Selamat,
ix
2014, p.24). So, as a basis for our study we have formulated our research
question as How to better use code-switching in 8th grade classes to facilitate
the teaching and learning of English at Escola do I Ciclo do Ensino Secundrio
N76 Mandume?

Participants of this study were 8th teachers (N=5) and 8th Grade pupils (N=78) at
Escola do I Ciclo n 76 Mandume, morning and afternoon periods (more
details given below in 3.1). Three research instruments were chosen for data
collection (detailed in 2.4 below) being: a) questionnaires for teachers and
pupils (RQs 14), b) a semi-structured interview for teachers (RQs 14) and
c) Classroom observation chart for teachers and pupils (RQ 2).

As to the studies on the same or similar topic, conducted at ISCED we could

find three studies related. One is by Ferreira (2004) and another by Elundula
(2014).Their studies were motivated by the same problem, that is, the misuse of
Portuguese in English Language classrooms. However, they differ in that while
Ferreiras study focused on using Portuguese to help grade 8 students learn
English, Elundula (2014) focused on the use of L1 in an ESP classroom to
enhance students learning achievement at Engineering Courses from ISPH in
contrast and the last one from Undangala which focused teachers code-
switching in grade 10 EFL classrooms at Escola secundria do Nambambi in
Lubango, contrary to ours which was motivated by teachers suspicion regarding
the use of code-switching and focused on How to better use code-switching in
8th grade classes to facilitate the teaching and learning of English at Escola do
I Ciclo do Ensino Secundrio n76 Mandume, having as our main objectives :
To raise teachers and pupils awareness on the attitudes, functions, and
factors those govern teachers decisions regarding code-switching
classrooms.

To assist teachers at Escola Mandume with some useful ways of using

code-switching and with effective strategies to help them avoid overuse

Contribute to the existing body of literature on the field at ISCED-Huila

University and also provide a piece of literature for Escola Mandume.

x
 Lastly, to raise policy makers awareness of the pedagogical value of
code-switching as a possible teaching and learning tool in the L2
classroom and to give it a proper place instead of relying on monolingual
practices only

To accomplish the set objectives our study was divided into three chapters
being the first one the review of literature, the second, presentation of the
research methodology used for data collection and the report of the results
obtained, lastly, the third chapter focuses on the analysis and discussion of the
findings obtained from the preceding chapters.

xi
CHAPTER ONE: LITEARTURE REVIEW
 CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.0. Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to describe and discuss the most prominent issues
concerned with the phenomenon of code-switching in EFL/ESL classrooms,
under the research purpose exploring the use of code-switching in EFL
classrooms. It broaches about several topics, divided into five sections. The
first section defines and differentiates some relevant terminology, the second
gives a brief overview of ELT methods and approaches, arguments for and
against code switching, and lastly useful applications of code-switching in
classroom. The third section deals with the functions of code switching
according to pupils and teachers. The fourth section concentrates on attitudes
towards code switching according to pupils and teachers. The fifth, discusses
the factors that govern teacher decisions regarding code-switching use or not of
code-switching. The sixth and last suggests some guidelines or strategies
teachers can use to prevent students from overusing their code-switching in
classroom and will end up by providing a conclusion.

Many authors (see for example Ahmad and Jusoff, 2009; Al-Nofaie, 2010; Cook
2001; Greggio and Gil, 2007; Gulzar, 2010; Harmer, 1998, 2007; Jacobson,
2012; Jingxia, 2010; Kamhuber, 2010; Kayaolu, 2012; Kim and Petraki, 2009;
Liu, Ahn, Baek and Han, 2004; Macaro, 2005; Magid and Mughadam, 2013;
Nation, 2003; Nordin, Zubir and Sadjirin, 2012; Sali, 2014; Selamat, 2014;
Svendsen, 2014; Yataanbaba and Yildirin, 2015) among others have been a
powerful influence to accomplish the objectives of this chapter.

Starting with the first point we are going to define and differentiate some
relevant terminology bring being (1) code-switching vs. borrowing, (2) code-
switching vs. code-mixing, (3) first language (L1), (4) second language vs.
foreign language, (5) target language. These will be dealt with in turn.

Code-switching vs. Borrowing

Attempts have been made to distinguish code-switching from Borrowing. A
simpler distinction between the two terms is given, for example by Milroy and
Muysken (1995). For them the term code-switching is used when the two codes

1
are used in a single clause or utterance whereas lexical borrowing is when the
lexical elements of one code is incorporated into another (as cited in Selamat,
2014). Another distinction by Gumperz (1982, p. 62 as cited in Selamat 2014,
p.19) says that borrowing is when single words or short, frozen, idiomatic
phrases are taken form one variety and introduced into another fitting into the
grammatical structure of the borrowing language. On the other hand, in code
switching the two distinct grammatical systems retain its internal rules (as
cited in Selamat 2014, p.19) such as morphological, phonological and syntactic
rule (Gardner-Chloros, 2009, p. 12) which is shared by Poplack (1980).

Code-switching vs. code mixing

Another distinction made is between code-switching and code-mixing. For some
like Muysken (2000 as cited in Gardner-Chloros, 2009) code-switching is
reserved for cases when the two codes maintain their monolingual
characteristics while code mixing is used to refer to instance where the two
codes converge in some way (p.12). Sridhar (1980 as cited in Gardner-Chloros,
2009, p.12) and Bokamba (1988 as cited in Gardner-Chloros, 2009, p.12) use
the term code switching when there is alternation within the sentence whereas
code mixing for alternations going beyond the sentence borders. Another
distinction is by Meisel (1989, as cited in Gardner-Chloros, 2009). He states that
in code-mixing there is a fusion of two grammatical systems. On the other hand,
in code-switching the language is pragmatically chosen taking into account the
interlocutor, topic, context, etc.

First Language (L1)

Researchers have tried to define first language. For example, according to
Richard and Schmidt (2010) first language generally denotes the mother tongue
of a person, that is, a language which was first acquired or yet a language one
is more comfortable with. The term is used interchangeably with native
language, and is also known as L1. This definition echoes those of Harmer
(2007) and Lightbown and Spada (1993 as cited in Elundula 2014). Llamas,
Mullany & Stockwell (2007) defined first language, also termed mother tongue,
L1, primary language and home language, as the language a person uses from
childhood. From these we can define first language as the language which is

2
acquired from childhood, the one used in the home or community or yet that
which one is more comfortable using.

Second Language vs. Foreign Language

As Defined by Richard and Schmidt (2010) second language can be defined in
two ways. In a broad sense, it can refer to any language a person learns after
their fist language is learnt. In a more narrow sense it denotes a language that
plays a major role in a particular country or region though it may not be the first
language of many people who use it (p. 514) which contrasts with foreign
language, which is not the native language of a given group of people in a
certain place and does not play an important rolefor communication neither in
government, in media nor even in schools as a medium of instruction but taught
formally as a subject to help them communicate with foreigners or for reading
printed materials in the language (p. 224). In other words, second language,
when contrasted to foreign language entails a language used by a community
for daily communication whereas foreign language is a language formally learnt
for the purpose of communicating with estrangers and for academic purposes
(being this the native language of other people).

Target language or L2
Target language has been defined by researchers such as Ellis (1985,
Lightbown and Spada 1993 as cited in Elundula, 2014; Richards & Schmidt
2010). For Ellis (1985, p. 304 as cited in Elundula, 2014, p. x) target language
denotes the language which is being learntincluding the natives speakers
language. It also refers to the language one is learning other than their first
language or mother tongue (Richards & Schmidt 2010). For Lightbown and
Spada (1993 as cited in Elundula, 2014) it encompasses the first, second, third
or fourth language being learnt which seems to be slightly different from
Richards and Schmidt (2010)s definition. Despite that, if I have correctly
understood, target language can be defined as any language which is being
learnt at a particular instance.

1.1. Historical Overview of ELT methods

The previous focused on defining some key terms. Now our attention is turned
to the history of ELT methods. Albeit the section deals with methods of code-
3
switching, some approaches were also thought to be of relevance here .It will
start with the methods against code switching and then those in favor.

1.1.1. Methods against code switching

This subsection will elaborate on the Methods and/or approaches that are in
some way against code switching.

1.1.1.1. Direct Method

Larsen-Freeman (2000) asserts that the direct method is an old method the
principles thereof have already been used by language teachers for several
years. It became popular due to the ineffectiveness of the Grammar Translation
Method (which is dealt with bellow, in this same chapter) in that learners under
this method could not use the language to communicate. It was developed at
the end of the nineteenth century challenging the views on grammar teaching
held by the Grammar Translation method (Thornbury, 2000, p. 21 as cited in
Kamhuber, 2010). Its basic rule is the prohibition of translation. Hence, the
name Direct Method, as it uses direct approach for communication of meaning.
That is, in the L2, using demonstration and visual aids without resorting to
learners mother tongue (Larsen-Freeman, 2000, p. 23).

The language that students use the most is the target language as if they were
in real situations (Larsen-Freeman 2000, p. 29).The inductive approach is
chosen in the teaching of grammar. Regarding vocabulary practice, students
are to use new vocabulary in full sentence, thus making vocabulary acquisition
more natural (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). The purpose of language learning is
communicationlanguage is learnt for communication purposes. As Larsen-
Freeman (2000) asserts, contrary to GTM, in the Direct Method, learners are
required not show what they know about the language but to use it both in oral,
speaking and writing.

Regarding the drawbacks of the method, Richards and Rogers (1986) list the
following: the ideal teacher was a native teacher or a native like fluency in the
FL teacher; Much rested on teachers shoulders who in turn lacked much of
what was required by the Direct Method; Total reliance on the Direct Method
which disregarded the L1 use which teachers would resort to for a more brief

4
explanation and efficient communication compared to the Direct Method use
made it counterproductive, say critics

1.1.1.2. Audio-lingual Method

Audio-lingual method, as stated by Richards (2001 as cited in Nunan, 2015) is
the most popular of the ELT methods, having as its language theory, structural
linguistics and behaviorism as a theory of learning. Language learning is
considered to result from a process of habit formation. The more often
something is repeated the stronger the habit and the greater the learning. That
is, the habit is strengthened and the learning increased in proportion to how
much it is repeated. One of the tenets of audiolingualism is that FL learning
should follow the same path as the L1 acquisition wherein rules are not to be
memorized but to be learnt by discovery or induction, and the L1 and the L2 are
to be separated to avoid much interference. It is the teachers task to provide a
good mode for learners imitation. Forming correct habits is the role of positive
reinforcement since their L1 is viewed as interference in the mastery of the
Target Language. This is the reason why the TL is used in classroom instead of
the L1, (Larsen-Freeman, 2000).

All the skills, i.e., listening, speaking, reading, and writing are given due value,
but most attention is devoted to oral/aural skills in that listening is the first to be
taught and students writing is based on that. As to Grammar only the inducted
approach is used. Students' reading and written work is based upon the oral
work they did earlier (Larsen-Freeman, 2000).

The method was severely criticized in the 1970s with the attack experienced by
structural linguistics and behavioral psychology (Nunan, 2015). As Larsen-
Freeman (2000) points out, learners were unable to communicate outside the
classroom using the habits mastered in the classtheir formed habits never
came out of the classroom. Still on the criticism it received, Chomsky objected
that, arguing Language is not a habit structureor habit formation, but rather
of rule formation (Larsen-Freeman 2000, p. 54).

5
 1.1.1.3. Total Physical Response (TPR)
TPR, a method by James Asher considered to be one of the methods belonging
to what is called the Comprehension approach (Larsen-Freeman 2000, p.
107)a name given for the fact that it gives more weight to listening which is
different from most methods that have speaking as priority and introduce it from
the start In TPR, language learning is believed to take place the same way a
child learns a first language. They first internalize the language through listening
to it and then speech follows effortlessly. Generally speaking, the goal of TPR is
the teaching of proficiency in speaking to beginners as it can turn them into able
learners, fluent communicators who can be understood by TL natives (Larsen-
Freeman, 2000).

A stress-free situation is a key factor to language learning success. Asher

believes that the acquisition of the L1 happens in a setting without stress,
opposite to that, stress and anxiety are most of the times considered to be
associated to adult language learning (Richards and Rogers, 1986) thus,
reducing stress in foreign language study is one of the primary justifications for
the TPRs existence (Larsen-Freeman, 2000) which can be achieved when the
focus in turned from studying abstract forms to meaning which are explained by
using body movements which is believed to make students free from self-
consciousness and stress-free situations which will enable the full use of their
energy to learning (Richards & Rogers, 1986). Also by keeping learners silent
until they feel ready to say something (Larsen-Freeman, 1986). And as Asher
argued, the fastest and least stressful way to achieve understanding of any
target language is to follow directions uttered by the instructor without native
language translation (Larsen-Freeman, p. 108).

1.1.1.4. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)

As revealed by Richards and Rogers (1986), language as communication is the
foundation of CLT approach to language teaching, the goal thereof is the
development of communicative competence, proposed by Hymes (1972). His
theory of CC defined the characteristics of a communicatively competent
speaker in a given speech community. According to him a communicatively

6
competent person possesses not only the knowledge but also the capability to
use language regarding...
1. Whether (and to what degree) something is formally possible;
2. Whether (and to what degree) something is feasible in virtue of the means of
implementation available;
3. Whether (and to what degree) something is appropriate (adequate, happy, successful)
in relation to a context in which it is used and evaluated;
4. Whether (and to what degree) something is in fact done, actually performed, and what
its doing entails.
(Hymes 1972, p. 281, as cited in Richards & Rogers 1986, p. 70).

According to Larsen-Freeman (2000), the feature that is mostly notorious in

communication is the intent of most activities. These activities can be role-plays
and solving problems. For Morrow (as cited in Johnson and Morrow, as cited in
Larsen-Freeman, 2000, p. 129) information gap, choice and feedback are the
characteristics of tasks that are really communicative. Another characteristic is
the use of authentic materials (pp. 12930) in that learners are given the
chance to cultivate procedures that enable them to understand language the
way it is used. That is, they should be introduced to proper language use and
there is equality and sufficiency in time allocated to using the language for
communication (LarsenFreeman, 2000).

Much stress is placed upon language functions than forms and all of the skills
are given attention from the beginning. Learners L1 is used judicially.
Nevertheless, this does not mean that the TL use is only reserved for
communicative activities rather, also for explaining the activities to the
students or in assigning homework, this so that they do not understand the
language only to be an object of study but also the means of communication
(Larsen-Freeman 2000, p. 132).

In CLT, grammar is taught indirectly or deductively and there is no standard for

classroom arrangement and from learners is required that their priority should
be their interaction with peers and only then with teachers. Limited or no place
is given to correction of errors (Richards & Rogers, 1986).

Regarding the drawbacks of the method, Richards and Rogers (1986) suggest
that the focus on fluency and comprehensibility in Communicative Language
7
Teaching may cause anxiety among teachers accustomed to seeing error
suppression and correction as the major instructional responsibility, and who
see their primary function as preparing learners to take standardized or other
kinds of tests.

1.1.1.5. Task Based Approach (TBA)

TBA has the same goal as CBI which is to engage students in a context where
they can use language naturally. Working for completion of tasks equals
sufficient opportunity for interaction. This in turn, as is though, makes students
acquisition of the language easy, seeing that they endeavor to a mutual
understands and to voice what they mean. Also, as they interact with one
another, they may encounter language that is way above their current capacity,
which they can, however, assimilate in the knowledge they possess of the L2 so
that it can benefit them later (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). According to Richards
and Rogers 2007, p. 231 as cited in Kamhuber, 2010, p. 57) A task based
approachconsists of task that learners perform.

A task is defined by Prabhu (1987 as cited in Kamhuber, 2010) as an activity

which requires learners to arrive at an outcome from given information through
some process of thought and Nunan (2004) presents two specific tasks being
this: real world or target tasks which has students needs analysis as its
basisthose they may find later in the real world, past the classroom; and
pedagogical tasks need not be activities to be encountered in the real world, but
those that take place in classroom. Their psycholinguistic base is SLA research
and theory (Nunan, 1989 as cited in Kamhuber, 2010).

1.1.1.6. Content Based Instruction (CBI)

CBI implication is to totally integrate language learning and content learning
(Stryker & Leaver, 2007).That is, as Widdowson (1978) asserts, schools should
teach topics from other subjects in English. This, for him should include for
instance simple experiments in physics and chemistry, biological processes in
plants and animals, map drawing and historical events (Widdowson, 1984, p.
19, as cited in Kamhuber, 2010, p. 48). By using CBI, the focus of instruction is
shifted from the simple learning of a language (language learning per se) to
studying the subject matter to learn the language (Stryker and Leaver, 2007, p.
8
5). Plus, learners motivation is activated as they know how relevant their use of
language is.

To conclude, alleged by CBI is that learners get two for one. That is, both their
knowledge about content and language proficiency are enhanced (Wesche,
1993 as cited in Larsen-Freeman, 2000, pp. 141142).

1.1.2. Methods in favor of code switching

The previous worked on the methods that oppose to the use of code switching.
Now attention will be devoted the methods in favor.

1.1.2.1. Grammar Translation Method

The grammar translation method, as the name suggests, had its main focus
grammar and translation. That is, the key aim was to train learners to be able to
master grammar and vocabulary by translating exercises into their native
language (Griffiths and Parr, 2001 as cited in Selamat, 2014) whereby students
success as language learners is evaluated (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). As a
result, as Nunan (2015) points out, the focus is on written language rather than
the spoken. The classroom is teacher-centered. Students L1 is most used in
class that is to make target language meaning clear and because of that it is
only used where all share the same mother tongue, as stated by Nunan (2015).

Regarding grammar, the deductive approach is used, as it is explicitly taught:

They learn the rules, memorize them and then use them in examples. L1
equivalents for TL vocabulary words are also memorized (Larsen-Freeman,
2000).

According to Nunan (2015) the method is still popular today and used in many
places worldwide. However, It received criticism during the World War II, being
the main reason for this that students learned a lot about the language but could
not benefit from it in regarding to communication, which he suggests is no
surprise as they had virtually no exposure to the TL ( Nunan 2015, p. 9).

1.1.2.2. Silent Way

This method, by Caleb Gattegno, seeks to develop learner independency on the
teacher which impacts their self-expression. As Larsen-Freeman (2000) says,
9
there is a need for students to have the ability to express themselves, that is,
what they think, how they perceive things and what they feel. This is
accomplished when they have become independent on the teacher and have
acquired a norm that enables them to inwardly decide on themselves what is
correct. That is, independence is achieved as learners trust themselves.
Consequently, it rests on the teacher to provide them with what is really needful
so that their learning is advanced.

Needless to say, the Silent Way is characterized by teachers silence, which is

considered the unique, [and] the most demanding aspect of the Silent Way.
The teacher uses gestures, charts, and manipulatives which enables elicitation
and shaping of learners answers. For that, he must be facile and creative as a
pantomimist and puppeteer (Richards & Rogers, 1987, p. 107). A distinctively
unique feature is the teaching materials which include a set of colored rods,
color-coded pronunciation and vocabulary wall charts, a pointer, and
reading/writing exercises as the main ones. (Richard & Rogers 1986, p. 108)

Another important feature of the Silent way is described by the following quote
by Gattegno: he says, The teacher works with the student; the student works
on the language. Another goes like this: only the learner can do the learning.
(Larsen-Freeman, 2000, p. 64). What it means is that learning is the students
responsibility. Students previous knowledge is a starting point to the teacher

Translation is not used in the Silent Way, but when needed, for instructions
and feedback. A more important role is that Learners L1 knowledge will provide
the Target Language teacher something to work with. For instance the teacher
uses sounds in students L1 that are similar or identical to the ones in the TL and
use them as the starting point for the introduction of the new sounds of the TL
(Larsen-Freeman, 2000, p. 65).

The teacher monitors students regularly and provides them assistance to

master feelings that cause interference, and as the lesson ends, via sessions of
feedback, they get a chance to express their feelings. That is, teachers take into
account their reports and together with learners find ways to help them get over
those negative feelings that are counterproductive to their learning. Last, with

10
the encouragement learners receive during the lessons to work together with
peers, the result should be a stress-free, enjoyable and pleasant learning
atmosphere (Larsen-Freeman, 2000).

Grammar is taught deductively where explicit grammar rules may never be

given, even if there is a focus on language structures, with restricted vocabulary
in the beginning. The four skills receive attention since the start; the difference
though lies in the sequence. That is, reading and writing proceed from previous
oral practice (Larsen-Freeman, 2000).

1.1.2.3. Desuggestopedia
Also, previously called suggestopedia, this method was developed by Georgi
Lozanov. For him, the language learning speed is not as fast as it could be. He
claims that we are not efficient because of psychological barriers we place
upon learning. Thus, the method was designed to help students eliminate the
feeling that they cannot be successful or the negative association they may
have toward studying and, thus, to help them overcome the barriers to learning
Larsen-Freeman (2000, p. 73).

Regarding the goals of the teachers in using suggestopedia, they endeavor to

speed up the process whereby foreign language is learnt for daily
communication, which occurs as teachers tap into more of their cognitive ability.
This is carried away as the psychological barriers they bring to the learning
situation is desuggested and the paraconscious part of the mind activated
(Larsen-Freeman, 2000, p. 81).

As stated by Richards and Rogers (1986), the way the classroom is decorated,
furnished, and arranged as well as the presence of music and the dependability
upon the teacher are considered to be the clearest features of suggestopedia.
The method regards students feelings highly, for this reason it is called s
affective-humanistic approach (Larsen-Freeman, 2000, p. 73). They believe
that most learning takes place in a relaxed but focused state That is, students
learn the most when they are relaxed or stress-free and focused (Richards &
Rogers, 1986, p. 142).

11
The importance of memorizing vocabulary is a key aim in suggestopedia.
Learners and teachers regard the recall of vocabulary very highly (Richards &
Rogers, 1986).The mother tongue is used to clarify meaning through translation
(Larsen-Freeman, 2000), vocabulary and communicative speaking are
highlighted as well as grammar that is inductively taught but at
minimum(Larsen-Freeman, 2000).

Larsen-Freeman (2000) asserts that one of the key principles of

dessugestopedia is that If students are relaxed and confident, they will not
need to try hard to learn the language. It will just come naturally and easily (p.
82).

1.1.2.4. Community Language Learning

Community Language Learning (CLL) is method developed by Charles A.
Curran and his associates (Richards & Rogers 1987). According to Larsen-
Freeman (2000) in this method teachers are advised to see their learners as
whole persons (p. 91) that is, together with their mental capacity, they should
also comprehend how to relate feelings among learners, plus how they
physically react, their instinctive protective react ions, and desire to learn (p.
91). More, he adds that as the name suggests, CLL means students work
together as a community, in cooperation and not competition.

The method is considered a type of humanistic approach which acknowledges

the use of code switching (Richards & Rogers, 1987, p. 119). Moreover, they
state that the most frequent use of CLL is for oral proficiency (p. 119). Also, in
this method, it is up to learners to name what they feel like to discuss and which
messages to convey to other learners. The task to appropriately communicate
these meanings in a way according to how proficient students are in their level,
however, rest upon the teacher. It is also believed that for a better learning to
occur students have a chance of choosing the type of practice they want. In this
way they know their own learning needs. This puts them in control which makes
them more responsible for their own learning (Richards & Rogers 1986).

As already said, the L1 use is allowed. As described by Larsen-Freeman (2000)

the primary purpose thereof is to enhance their security. Second, it functions as

12
a bridge whereby they move from what is known to that which is unknown.
Third, it can also be used to provide L1 equivalents to the target language
thus making it easier to understand their meaning and enhance their ability to
form new sentences. The L1 is also used for directions and for students to
express what they feel. This makes the method neither teacher-centered nor
student-centered but teacher-student centered. That is, they both make
decision in classroom (Larsen-Freeman, 2000).

This section has reviewed the ELT methods and Approaches in Second
Language Acquisition and through this we could see that there are methods and
approaches that see switching to L1 as a bad practice that should not be
allowed in classroom, others see a very limited role of it and others vote for it. A
closer look at these can also show us that some methods and/ or approaches
would work better with high proficiency level students while others with
beginners who have a lower English proficiency level.

1.2. Issues and debates about code switching in the English

language classroom
Having discussed the methods and approaches against and those for code
switching in classroom, now in this subsection, attention will be given to some
arguments for and against the use of code switching. Let us now start talking
about the arguments against.

1.2.1. Arguments against code switching

The debate in the target field has been on whether code switching to the L1
should be welcomed or not in the in the L2 classroom. And for more than two
centuries language experts and practitioners have frequently shown disfavor for
its use (Hall and Cook 2012; Thompson 2006, as cited in Blackman,
2013/2014).

Probably, the frequent argument against the use of classroom code switching is
that it has no place whatsoever in the classroom and all should be done to
avoid it (Cook 2001, as cited 2001, in Parry, 2011). It is also neglected in
teaching methodology (Parry, 2011). Even during the stage where methods that
were L1 use was naturally allowed, akathe Grammar translation method, the
13
best thing theorists could do was to overlook it. At a later stage the
communicative approach went so far as to nearly advocate target language use
only.

Connected to this comes the natural approach with the attempt to totally remove
it from the classroom (Blackman, 2013/2014). In fact when it is referred to, most
of the times, it is on how it should be avoided (Atkinson, 1987 as cited in Parry
2011). This issue is the result of the emergence of the direct method and audio-
lingual method (Nordin et.al, 2012 & Kayaolu, 2012, p. 32).

Parry (2011) states that the most popular assumption for the sole use of the L2
is that the mother tongue are believed to be associated to the Grammar
translation. That is, proponents of the English Only instruction claim that by
using the L1 in the classroom, one is returning to an outdated methodology,
already shown to be unfruitful a number of times (see also Macaro, 2005).

Proponents of these methods contend that there is no need for learners to

grasp all that they hear in ESL classroom, as code-switching negatively affects
the learning process (Brown, 2007) interfering in it for example through the
learners transfer of certain features from their L1 to the target language (Ellis
1985, as cited in Sillvani, 2014). Another claim is that code switching translates
into linguistic deficit and incompetence (Boztepe, 2005; Milroy & Muysken,
1995; Probyn, 2009; Wein & Martin, 2009 as cited in Selamat 2014, p. 15).
Plus, some also believe that the linguistic forms transfer of the L1 to the L2
interferes negatively and thereby the development of proficiency and accuracy
in the second language be hindered (Ellis & Shintani, 2013, p. 13 as cited in
Selamat, 2014). For Chambers (1991; Halliwell and Jones, 1991; Macdonald,
1993 as cited in Jingxia, 2010) L1 use is unable to promote inquisitive quality in
learners, as a result learners will not be able to learn the language outside the
classroom. They favor the TL only due to the greater exposure to the second
language it provides which is more likely to make learners proficient in the TL,
and the L1 robs them of such a valuable input (Xiaoil, 2013).

Having talked over the arguments against code switching, we now turn to the
arguments in support of it.

14
 1.2.2. Arguments for code switching
As an answer to opponents of code-switching, supporters of L1 use have also
shown that it does deserve a place in L2 classroom, as a powerful influence on
second language learning (Swan, 1997 as cited in Parry 2011, p. 1) .They see
code switching as natural practice in the classroom. That is, as an expected
phenomenon in the teaching and learning of the L2. (Atkinson, 1987, 1993;
Macaro, 1999; Cook, 2001 as cited in Lui et al, 2004), once, as opposed to the
L1 which does not need the support of other language to be learnt, the L2 is
learned aided by the L1 (Cook, 2001, as cited in Parry, 2011). As Cook (2000;
as cited in Jingxia, 2010, p.11) argued that the classroom is a natural code-
switching (p.406), meaning that it is expected to occur naturally switching to the
L1, and allowing L1 in L2 classrooms is a humanistic approach towards the
learners. Along the same lines, as stressed by Wright (2010, as cited in
Svendsen, 2014) schools should not overlook pupils native language, but
instead respect it. Skiba (1997; as cited in Ahmad and Jusoff, 2009) adds that it
allows the effective transfer of information from the sender to the receiver
(p. 4). On the same grounds, Cook recommended the use of L1 every time the
cost of the TL is too great (2001, p. 418).

Another important argument by advocators of L1 use is that code switching

reduces affective barriers to English acquisition (Auerbach, 1993, p.9).As
regards to this claim, Meyer (2008, as cited in Parry, 2011) adds that at the
surface level L1 can reduce the anxiety of students in classroom (p. 8).This
happens because when teachers resort to L1, learners may be able to better
comprehend the input provided by the teacher, and this makes them feel at
ease. An evidence for this is a study by Ahmad and Jusoff (2009) with low
proficiency learners in Malaysia. He found that when teachers used students
mother tongue, learners felt less pressured, nervous and worried, due to the
comfortable atmosphere created by teachers code switching.

Summing it all up we could see that there are differing views regarding the use
of code-switching in classroom. One group thinks it is not an acceptable
classroom practice and seeks to ban it, while others see a role it can play and

15
consider it an unavoidable practice. However, they do not advocate
uncontrolled use of it.

Having ended this debate, we are now moving to some useful applications of
code-switching provided by some of its supporters.

1.3. Useful Applications of code-switching in the classroom

On the basis of the discussion above, supporters of code-switching (see for
example (Atkinson, 1987; Butzkamm, 2011 as cited in stnel, 2016; Cook,
2001; Harmer, 2009 as cited in Silvani, 2014; Schweers, 1999; Voicu, 2012)
have proposed ways of using code-switching efficiently in the EFL classroom.
Here, because of space provided we will only mention some uses of it (see
more in Appendix G). Based on some of these authors, code-switching may be
used as a: a technique to save time, to compare grammar, vocabulary and
cultures, for classroom management, for discussing errors and teach grammar,
etc).

Saving-time technique
As Voicu (2012) states, code-switching can be an easier or a more efficient
strategy to give a translation of vocabulary item or to explain a grammar point
than to give long explanation in the MT. For example, trying to teach the word
car it would be enough to give a simple definition than explaining that a car is
a road vehicle with an engine, four wheels, and seats for a small number of
people. This agrees with Cooks belief that code-switching could be used by
teachers when the cost of L1 is too greater (Cook 2000, p. 418 as cited in
Jingxia, 2010, p. 11) either making students processing or understanding of the
L2 much difficult or time consuming (Jingxia 2010).

Comparison
Comparing English and the mother tongue can be very a rewarding experience;
by focusing on comparing the differences and similarities of the two languages
acquisition is enhanced. The different levels it can be done are on: vocabulary
and grammar (Voicu, 2012).

Culture

16
As stated by Voicu (2012), being language a vehicle for cultural aspects,
banning the use of the mother tongue, implies that this culture is inferior.
Comparing and contrasting cultures can assist students in accepting and
tolerating differences, without losing the uniqueness of their culture. This can be
done by finding equivalent proverbs in their mother tongue or translating from
the TL to their mother tongue. This can also work with idiomatic expressions,
translating songs jokes (to create a stress-free environment).

Classroom management
Classroom management involves, among others, to motivate, discipline and
praise pupils, and to signal a change of footing (Fergusson, 2003, in stnel, p.
97). Management of conduct and discipline, for example, is sometimes hard
to be done in the target language. For instance, if a serious problem
emerges in the classroom, will the teacher really insist on (Voicu 2012). As
stated by stnel (2016, p. 93) citing Chambers (1992 and Harbord 1992), code
switching functions particularly in cases of learner disruption, when using the
TL is likely to have little or no effect, even if understood.

Discussion of recurring errors

Since many errors made by students is a result of negative L1 transfer, this can
be an activity of great benefit for them in that it will help them overcome this
problems. French students, for example, say Im agree instead of I agree
which is an error due to L1 transfer (in French Je suis daccord as cited in
Voicu, 2012, pp. 214-215).

Grammar
As asserted by Cook, grammar teaching is a beneficial opportunity to switch to
L1 seeing that even advanced L2 users are less efficient at observing
information from the L2 than from the L1 (2001, p. 414). It can work perfectly
for example by translating grammar points that students are struggling with
(Voicu, 2012).

Consciousness raising
Butzkamm (2011) has the use of code-switching for consciousness raising as
indispensable in language learning. He believes that seeing that the L2 is built
17
directly onto the L1, this should be reflected in the way languages are used in
classroom (as cited in stnel 2016, p.181). Further, he specifically applies the
use of code-switching to give the learner the opportunity for double
comprehension as s/he identifies the forms and functions of both languages. He
believes that learners will be able to extend new grammatical forms far beyond
the initial context where learning occurred, if they can code-switch to apply new
L2 forms to their current L1 functions (a cited in stnel 2016). As he suggests,
one way it can be achieved is by strategically repeating any given form of both
languages another way is by directly making learners conscious of how both
languages connect through mirroring forms and functions in both languages(
as cited in stnel, 2016, p.182).

1.4. Functions of Code Switching Empirical studies

The functions of code switching employed by students and teachers were
investigated, and similar as well as different functions were identified by
different researchers. These will be dealt with in the subsequent paragraphs.

1.4.1. Functions of code switching according to pupils

Greggio and Gils (2007) conducted a research in Brazil regarding the use of
learners mother tongue (Portuguese) using classroom observation, informal
talks with participants, field notes and class recording as the instruments for
data collection. The participants were one group of beginners and the other pre-
intermediate students. The findings showed that teachers and learners both
employed code switching for different functions. Based on the functions of the
two groups learners code switching served the following functions: to maintain
the flow of conversation, to fill linguistic gap, to provide equivalent meaning(s) in
L1, to ask equivalent meaning(s) in L2, to ask about grammatical rules and
structures to clarify understanding of grammatical rules or structures.

Another and the last research for this paper is one by Selamats (2014) in
Malaysia with ten teachers and sixty students from two secondary schools
through questionnaires, semi-structured interviews and classroom observation
The study indicates that students used their L1 as a learning strategy to
compensate for their limited competence in the target language more
specifically due to difficulties expressing themselves in the target language, and
18
interacting with peers who share the same language, to help them maintain the
flow of conversation and to explain difficult words and sentences to their peers,
being to maintain the flow of conversation the same found by Greggio and Gils
and similar to express themselves in the target language which is Greggio and
Gils to to fill linguistic gap.

1.4.2. Functions of code switching according to teachers

The aforementioned study by Greggio and Gil (2007) found that teachers
employed code switching to mark the beginning of class, to get the learners
attention, to maintain the planned structure of the class, to facilitate/clarify
understanding of grammatical rules, structures, words and expressions, to
provide equivalent meaning (s) in L1/ to translate vocabulary, to give advice,
and to elicit vocabulary and grammatical structures

Another study was conducted by Gulzar (2010) aiming at identifying the

significance of each function of code-switching and the specific pedagogical
functions it serves in the classrooms through a survey with 406 teachers in
Pakistani EFL classrooms. The research showed that teachers code switching
served the following functions: clarification, ease of expression, giving effective
instruction, creating a sense of belonging, checking understanding, translation,
socializing, emphasis, repetitive functions, topic shift, and linguistic competence
(with clarification, translation and socializing being similar to that of Greggio &
Gil, 2007).

Salamats (2014) study also revealed some similar functions to those from
Greggio and Gils (2007) study like, to facilitate students comprehension and
knowledge of target language grammar. The other functions were to explain
vocabulary, sentences and grammar, encourage participation in classroom
activities, to increase motivation and confidence and to maintain classroom
discipline.

One last study on the same issue is that of Yataanbaba and Yiridin (2015) in a
secondary Turkish school in Adana and Denizli using video recordings and
semi-structured interviews. They found that code switching was used mainly for
translation, meta-language, asking equivalence, giving instruction and

19
classroom management purposes, being translation the same as that found in
the study of Greggio and Gil (2007) and Gulzar (2010) and classroom
management purposes similar to Greggio and Gils calling/getting the learners
attention.

1.5. Attitudes towards code switching in the classroom:

Empirical studies
Having reviewed the studies on the functions of code-switching according to
pupils and teachers at, this section will deal with the attitudes towards code-
switching according to pupils and teachers.

1.5.1. Attitudes towards code-witching according to pupils

Many studies have been conducted on students attitudes towards code
switching. In this study I will refer to only some of them.

Kim and Petraki (2009)s in Kim and Petrakis (2009) investigation in a Korean
multilevel secondary school in Vietnam with 6 native English teachers and 6
native Korean speakers and 30 students ten for each level (beginners,
intermediate and advanced students) using questionnaires, interviews and
observation indicated that teachers and students and Korean teachers, contrary
to the native English teachers were of the opinion that code switching was
beneficial as it provided support for language teaching.

Jacobson (2012) also conducted a study with 87 students and 90 teachers of

four secondary Swedish classes (two from eighth grade and the other from
ninth grade) through questionnaires, observation and interview. For the
interview only four teachers were selected. The aim of the research was to
investigate when and why code-switching occurs and the attitudes towards
code-switching among teachers and students. The results indicated differing
views on the part of students. The great majority believed that they should
speak English more in the classroom as English only is the only acceptable and
it would help their learning process whilst others, the minority of them believed
they needed to be motivated to speak Swedish more

20
Salamats (2014) study, the some already mentioned above revealed that the
majority of learners showed a positive attitude towards code switching. They
recognized the pedagogical merits of the use of their L1 alongside the L2 as it
was a valuable tool for teaching.

1.5.2. Attitudes towards code switching according to teachers

Investigations were also done to find out teachers attitudes towards code
switching.

Jacobsons (2012) study which has been mentioned above showed that
teachers presented both positive and negative views about the use of code
switching. On the one hand, all the teachers were of one accord saying that
code-switching is not preferable in the EFL classroom and that English classes
should be solely conducted in English, as it can confuse learners. On the other
hand it was indicated by some teachers that code switching can only be
beneficial if used correctly and for a short period of time and can be used in
grammar teaching and learning whereas others preferred that during their
English lessons English was used most of the times.

Another study by Magid and Mughadam (2013) we have already referred to

showed that despite the fact that code switching is seen with suspicion, ESL
teachers had a positive view towards its use in classroom. They argued that its
use in these contexts cannot be avoided.

Selamats (2014) study already referred to above showed that teachers held
both positive and negative attitudes towards the use of Malay in English
classrooms. A large number of them believed that code switching was a positive
influence on the process of language learning, recognizing its pedagogical
merits. On the other hand they were also concerned about its negative impact,
believing that it would hinder the language learning process.

Another study by Sali (2014) with three Turkish teachers of a secondary school,
using audio recording observation and semi-structured interview, aiming at
examining the functions and explore teachers perspectives towards code
switching found that all the teachers had a positive attitude towards the use of

21
L1 and tended to believe that switching to L1 facilitated the learner
comprehension.

In summary, these studies on teachers and students attitudes towards code

switching showed that there is still some controversy on the use of code-
switching where some seem to be more for English only teaching whilst others
see a need for the inclusion of code-switching in English language classrooms.
It also shows that despite the difference of opinions, code-switching is a
valuable tool to the teaching and learning of English which should not be
disregarded, however it should never take the dominant place.

Having thrashed out what students and teachers attitudes are, regarding code
switching use in the classroom, the next section will endeavor to examine the
factors that govern teachers decisions regarding code-switching

1.6. Factors that govern teachers decisions regarding code-

switching
It has been argued that code switching is a natural practice in the L2 classroom
(Atkinson, 1987, 1993; Macaro 1996, 1997; Cook, 2001; as cited in Liu, Ahn,
Baek and Han, 2004) and a useful tool (Atkinson, 1987; Auerbach,1993) which
alike other strategies is to be used when necessary (Meyer, 2008, in Parry
2011). But what do teachers need to know when deciding about code switching
use or not? This is what this section will try to work on.

Following authors like Liu et al., 2004, p. 606; Duff & Polio, 1990; Franklin,
1990; F. Chambers 1991; G. Chamber, 1992; as cited in Liu et al., 2004;
Macaro 2005; Johansson, 2013; and Sali, 2014, the following factors can be
identified:
Students level. Harmer (2007) says that it needs to make difference
between levels, For example, explaining and enhancing rapport in the L1
may be appropriate at lower levels but when they grow in their E, it may
not be used for these function as well as their English grows. But
translations and L1 and L2 equivalence may still be encouraged and
used.

22
 Students abilities. Concerning students abilities, Macaro (2005) refers to
research results which suggest that students L1 is more used by
teachers in the secondary sector with low proficient learners in the L2
due to their difficulties with inference of meaning which can make them
subject to stress with more facility. The use of the L1 will help diminish
the stress which otherwise would, according to Parry (2011) hamper the
target language
L1 and L2 differences. That is, the closer the two languages are, the
more L1 is used.
Teaching methods used
Lesson content. Here teachers decide on the efficiency of the two
approaches for particular topics and choose which is more efficient.
Learners behavior and their attitudes towards the L1 or L2.
Learners proficiency
Types of classroom activities. Macaro (2005) says that some activities
are best conducted in the L1 while others are best conducted in the L2.
For example, the way learners accumulate more lexical items which is by
deduction, in other words, through the already possessed, is only made
possible when exposed to larger amount knowledge of the L1.Therefore,
the L2 here is preferred. In listening activities, however, during the pre-
listening stage, it is best to be conducted in the L1 due to, for example
the possible amount of information contained in the listening text learners
are about to listen to which is new to them and is likely to require much
effort from the teacher when attempting to give background information
in the target language, once this background is also unknown to the
learner as the content of the imminent listening text.

Below are some research studies that found some of these factors as
determinants to their use or not of code switching.

Regarding students level, Al-Nofaie (2010) conducted a research in Saudi

Arabia with thirty students and three teachers in an intermediate school, using
questionnaire, interview and observation. The aim was to find out teachers and
students attitudes towards the use of Arabic as facilitating tool in English

23
intermediate classes. When they were asked about the reasons for employing
or avoiding Arabic, they referred to students level. The three teachers agreed
that beginners needed more explanation in Arabic because they needed good
progress in English yet.

Another study by Sali (2014) with three Turkish teachers of a secondary school,
using audio recording observation and semi-structured interview, aiming at
examining the functions and explore teachers perspectives towards code
switching, revealed that their need of the use of students L1 was informed by,
among other factors, learners proficiency and types of classroom activities. This
agrees with other researchers such as Rolin-Ianzity & Brownlie (2002, as cited
in Lui et al., 2004; Macaro 2005).

Another important study and the last in this section is that of Yataanbaba and
Yldrm (2015), already referred to above. They indicated that when using code
switching classroom conditions was also believed to be a determining factor to
the use of students L1.They regarded as an aid to attract learners attention as
well as enhance their motivation to learn English.

1.7. Strategies teachers should use to avoid pupils overuse of

code-switching
The previous section discussed some factors that need to be considered in the
decision of codes-witching or not. This section will concentrate in providing
some guidelines/ strategies teachers need in order to prevent students from
overusing code-switching in classroom.

Following Harmer (1998, 2001) and Nation (2003) some strategies that need to
be used in order to avoid overuse of code-switching in classroom will be
suggested and discussed.

Harmer (1998, pp.131-32), trying to help teachers attempt to prevent students

overuse of code-switching suggests the following strategies:
Talk to them about the issue: It means that teacher should to their learners
the feelings they should have about the use of their L1 or English in class.
That it is, their L1 use decreases the opportunity of learning English. They

24
 also have to be of the same mind that, their L1 may, for example, during
speaking activities may be counterproductive as it will rob them of
opportunities for rehearsal and feedback (p.131)
Encourage them to use English appropriately: clarify that their L1 is not
totally disallowed but should take into account what is going on. For
example, the goal speaking active exercise will be lost, if the L1 is used, but
it may be ok to use when working with reading text
Only respond to English use: The teacher gives attention only to English
while ignoring the mother tongue.
Create an English environment: Teachers do this by speaking English most
of the times.
Keep reminding them: I can be done by encouraging, cajoling, pleading with
them and when if needed, help. The more it is repeated, they way they
behave undergo a slow change as time goes by.

Harmer (2001, p.35)

Acknowledge the L1: It is widely accepted that the use of L1 in L2
learning is important and should not be avoided.
Use appropriate L1, L2 activities: Through using L1 grammar and
vocabulary activities can be effectively done in the classroom.
Differentiate between levels: As they work more in L2, their need for L1
will get less, but they may still need translation which is considered as
the fifth skill.
Agree clear guidelines: Students need to know when the use of L1 is
beneficial
Use encouragement and persuasion: Students may need
encouragement to speak in L2.

Nation (2003, p.6) suggests the following: i. Choose manageable tasks that are
within the learners' proficiency, ii. Prepare learners for tasks by pre-teaching the
language items and skills needed iii. Use staged and graded tasks that bring
learners up to the level required, v. Get learners to pretend to be English
speakers, vi. Make the L2 an unavoidable part of the task, vii. Retelling
activities, strip stories, completion activities, and role plays all require the use of
25
the L2, viii. Repeat tasks to make them easier, ix. Inform learners of the learning
goals of each task so that they can see how using the L2 will help them achieve
a clear short term learning goal, x. Discuss with the learners the value of using
the L2 in class, xi. Get learners to discuss the reasons why they avoid using the
L2 and get them to suggest solutions to encourage L2 use, xii. Set up a
monitoring system to remind learners to use the L2. In group work speaking
tasks this can involve giving one learner in each group the role of reminding
others to use the L2.Use non-threatening tasks, xiii. Learners can choose their
own groups, the teacher can stay out of the groups, allow learners to prepare
well for the tasks, don't use tasks that put learners in embarrassing situations,
and choose interesting, non-threatening topics

Conclusion
This chapter broached about several topics, divided into five sections. The first
section focused on defining some key terms, a brief overview of ELT methods
and approaches, arguments for and against code switching, and lastly some
useful applications of code-switching. The second section concentrated on the
functions code switching according to pupils and teachers. The third section
dealt with attitudes towards code switching according to pupils and teachers.
The fourth, discussed the factors that determine teacher use or not of code-
switching. The fifth and last suggested some strategies teachers should use to
prevent students from overusing code-switching in classroom.

To sum up, the reviewed literature shows that there are some practical and/or
useful applications of code-switching in classroom as technique to save time,
compare grammar and vocabulary, culture, for classroom management,
discussion of errors, and consciousness raising.

We have also examined the functions of code-switching. The literature review

shows that pupils use their L1 to maintain the flow of conversation, to provide
equivalent meaning(s) in L1, to ask equivalent meaning(s) in L2, to ask about
grammatical rules and structures to clarify understanding of grammatical rules
or structures when they have difficulties expressing themselves in the target
language, and interacting with peers who share the same language, to help

26
them maintain the flow of conversation and to explain difficult words and
sentences to their peers.

As to teachers code-switching is used mainly for ease of expression, to check

understanding, to explain vocabulary, sentences and grammar, encourage
participation in classroom activities, to increase motivation and confidence and,
asking equivalence, giving instruction, to mark the beginning of class, to get the
learners attention, to maintain the planned structure of the class, to
facilitate/clarify understanding of grammatical rules, structures, words and
expressions, to provide equivalent meaning (s) in L1/ to translate and/or explain
vocabulary, to elicit vocabulary and grammatical structures and to give advice.

Teacher and pupils attitudes towards code-switching were also examined and it
was found that overall, teachers and pupils have a positive attitude towards
code-switching, acknowledging its pedagogical merits and agree that it is a
valuable tool to the teaching and learning of English which should not be
disregarded, however it should not be overused. Only a little number had some
reservations

As to determinant factors on the use or avoidance of code switching, lesson

content, teaching methods, types of classroom activities L1 and L2 differences,
students level, abilities, proficiency, behavior, their attitudes and classroom
conditions were identified

Lastly, this chapter also presented some strategies that teachers should use to
avoid pupils overuse of code-switching in classroom, strategies like: talk to
them about the issue, encourage them to use English appropriately, only
respond to English use, create an English environment by getting them to
pretend to be English speakers, make L2 an unavoidable part of the task,
discuss with them the value of using the L2 in class, suggest solutions to
encourage L2 use and present reasons why they should avoid using the L2
keep reminding them, choose manageable tasks that are within their
proficiency, pre-teach the language items and skills needed, use staged and
graded tasks that bring them up to the level required, repeat tasks to make

27
them easier, Inform them of the learning goals of each task and use non-
threatening tasks.

To put an end to it, our main conclusion is that code-switching is indeed an

unavoidable phenomenon in EFL classrooms and although still controversial
and divisive, it is of great benefit to the teaching and learning of English as a
foreign language, as it can be applied in many ways in classroom and serves
various functions however, it should never overtake the L2 use which is
achieved should teachers be cognizant of when and how to use it in a beneficial
way as well as apply the correct strategies to avoid its overuse.

28
CHAPTER TWO: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
 CHAPTER TWO: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
2.0. Introduction
The main concern of the previous chapter was to describe and discuss the most
prominent issues concerned with the phenomenon of code-switching in
EFL/ESL classrooms. It has broached about pupils and teachers attitudes
towards code-switching, functions employed by them, factors teachers take into
account in their decisions regarding code-switching and the strategies to avoid
code-switching overuse. The main conclusion we have come to is that code-
switching is indeed an unavoidable phenomenon in EFL classrooms and
although still controversial and divisive, it is of great benefit to the teaching and
learning of English as a foreign language. however, it should never overtake the
L2 use which is achieved should teachers be cognizant of when, how and for
what purpose to use it in a beneficial way as well as apply the correct strategies
to avoid its overuse. This chapter describes the research methodology. To
accomplish this purpose it is divided into two main sections, being the first, the
methodology and the second the presentation of the results obtained from the
research instruments, which will be dealt with in turn.

2.1. Methodology
This section reports the methodology used in the collection of the data needed
to the postulated research purpose: Exploring the use of code-switching at
Escola do I Ciclo do Ensino Secundrio N 76 Mandume For that the
section is divided into four subsections. The first deals with the context of the
research, the second gives a description of the period of study, the third and
fourth look at the methods and procedures used for data collection. But before
we go any further some key terms such as research, methodology, methods,
research design data and sampling techniques need to be defined.

Regarding research, Nunan (2002) gives an all inclusive, all encompassing

definition of research as a systematic process of enquiry consisting of three
elements or components: (1) a question, a problem or hypothesis, (2) data, (3)
analysis and interpretation of data. For Drnyei (2007, quoting Hatch and
Lazaraton, 1991, p. 1) it is the organized, systematic search for answers to the
questions we ask. And according to Richard and Schmidt (2010) it can be
29
defined as the study of an event, problem, or phenomena using systematic
methods in order to understand it better and develop principles about it.
Following these definitions I can define research as a systematic, and/ or
organized process of enquiry involving the study of an event, problem, and
phenomenon or answering questions and proving hypothesis through scientific
procedures as data collection, analysis and interpretation with the purpose of
gaining a better understanding of it and creating new principles and theories.

As to methodology Richards and Schmidt (2010) define it as The procedures

used in carrying out an investigation, including the methods used to collect and
analyze data (p. 364). In a simpler way it is the means of doing something
(Mouton 2001, p.35 as cited in Cacumba, 2014, p.106)

As Harding (1987 in Cacumba 2014, p. 107) puts it Methods refer to techniques

and procedures used in data collection during the research process. This
includes questionnaire, observation, interview, document analyses and are
used as basis for inference and interpretation for explanation and predictions
Cohen, Manion and Marrison (2007, p. 47).

Research Design is defined a plan and structure of investigation used to obtain

answers to research questions (Kerlinger, 1986, in Cacumba 2014, p. 107).
Kothari (2004) says that,
(i) It is a plan that specifies the sources and types of information relevant to the
research problem. (ii) It is a strategy specifying which approach will be used for
gathering and analysing the data. (iii)It also includes the time and cost budgets since
most studies are done under these two constraints (p.32)

Regarding data Drnyei (2007) states that it is concerned with the essence of
people, objects and situations, i.e., opinions, beliefs, reaction, behavior.
Richard and Schmidt (2010) see it as information, evidence or facts gathered
through experiments or studies which can be analyzed in order to the better
understanding of phenomena or to support a theory (p. 154). Based on all
these definitions it can be said that data is considered as not only the behavior
but also beliefs, opinions, information, evidence, reactions and facts observed
and or/gathered by an investigator which are subject to analysis and be used for
problem solving or backing up a theory.
30
Population is defined by Drnyei (2007, p. 96) as the group of people whom
the study is about Sampling is define as the procedure of selecting a sample
[part of the population which represents its whole, Drnyei 2007] (Richards
Schmidt, 2010, p.506). In this study we have used convenience sample, in
which according to Richards and Schmidt (2010, p. 506) the only chosen
participants are those who are conveniently available that is, those who meet
certain criteria as geographical proximity, availability, at a certain time, easy
accessibility or the willingness to volunteer (Drnyei 2007, p. 99)as in this
study, only those who were found available at the time of the research were
chosen.

2.2. Context of the Research

To achieve the set aim I have worked with both teachers and pupils from Escola
do I Ciclo do Ensino Secundrio N 67 Mandume, located in Comandante
Cow-Boy quarter, on the outskirts of Lubango Municipality, Province of Huila
which occupies the surface of ten thousand square meters. It was inaugurated
on 14th July 2010 by the governor of Huila Province, Isaac dos Anjos. (See
more athttp://www.angolabelazebelo.com/2010/07/lubango-mais-alunos-na-
escola-mandume/). The institution aims at preparing pupils to face secondary
education. They have 3 English sessions a week and the content is taken from
Get Ahead in English. They are all beginners and are expected at this level to
master skills such as: comprehension and oral expression, comprehension and
writing expression and language functioning (Programa de Ingles 7, 8 e 9
classes I CICLO DO ENSINO SECUNDARIO)

2.3. Participants
5 teachers took part in this study, having been teaching from 4 to 14 years and
all having Portuguese as their L1. Three of them were trained at EFP and one
of them also trained at ISCED, while other only at ISCED, where one has a
Licenciatura Degree in Linguistics English.

A number of 79 pupils from a population of approximately 150 from morning and

afternoon periods, doing 8th grade, whose ages range from 12 to 14 (daytime
pupils) and 15 to 17 years old (those in the afternoon) which makes them all

31
teenagers who started learning English since 7th grade, participated in the
research. They were selected according to their availability, that is, those who
were found present in classroom, which were few since it was the first week of
the second term when lessons had just re-started. The reasons why I have
chosen to work at Escola Mandume with these participants are: First it is while
working there during T.P sessions that realizing the importance of codes-
witching, I noticed this might be a problem with some teachers there. Second, in
my own school, in Matala Municipality I am the only teacher and there was no
way I could conduct my research there, and third, there were some teachers
who are friends of mine and I thought they would facilitate the process.

2.4. Period of Study

Our research instruments were complete and ready for implementation on the
last week of April. The tutor of this paper gave some hints on improving it and a
pilot study was done in the first week of May with two teachers and four 8 th
Grade 8th pupils from Mandume; they helped me check for some ambiguities in
the questionnaires and helped me see better what might be a difficulty with
students in filling in the form. Having made some slight changes the final pupil
questionnaire was designed and administered on the third week along the
teacher questionnaire which was not piloted.

2.5. Methods
This study used a descriptive, mixed methods research (quantitative and
qualitative researchusing questionnaires, interviews and classroom
observation). According to Richards and Schmidt (2010) a descriptive study
attempts to describe accurately and factually a phenomenon, subject or area
(p. 164). It is descriptive because it endeavors to describe how the
phenomenon of code switching is used in English language classrooms or how
it impacts the teaching and learning of English at Escola do I Ciclo Mandume
and mixed-methods type of research because it uses a combination of
quantitative and qualitative method in the same study (see Johnson and
Christensen 2004, as cited in Drnyei 2007, p. 163 and Drnyei, 2007, p. 163).

32
The questionnaire, specifically for the functions was designed by grouping some
of the items contained in the findings of were adapted from the Greggio and Gil
(2007, p. 386 and 389), Magid and Mughadam (2013) and Selamat (2014, p.
163166) and Yataanbaba and Yridim (2015) while the attitudes adapted from
Selamat (2014) questionnaire and some of its structure on the functions both for
teachers and students was adapted from Ferreira (2004).The items in the
factors considered in teachers decisions regarding code-switching came from
Johansson (2013) ; Liu et al., (2004); Macaro (2005); Sali (2014) and the
strategies to avoid overuse of code-switching from Nation (2003) and Harmer
(2001, 2007). The questionnaire was administered and collected on the same
day and students answered it by circling, and putting an asterisk. The students
questionnaire was translated in Portuguese and the teacher questionnaire was
done in English only.

A semi-structured interview was employed for this study and was based and
adapted from Selamat, 2014, according to the research questions regarding
teachers attitudes, functions of code-switching, factors they consider in their
decisions to or not to code-switch and the strategies used to avoid the pupils
overuse of code-switching. In a semi-structured interview, the researcher guides
the interview but he does not exercise full control. In this, respondents were not
only be provided with identical set of questions but will also be given some
freedom to deviate from the guide in other to probe for more information
(Mackey and Gass, 2005, p. 173). This was used to enhance the reliability of
the findings and for triangulation purposes.

Another instrument used for this study was a highly structured observation, in
which according to Mackey and Gass (2005), the investigator often uses a
detailed checklist or rating scale which makes it easy to record details like
when, where, and how often certain types of phenomena occur (p.175). This
permits the researcher to, conscientiously draw comparisons of behaviors
crosswise research contexts. Additionally, it can also allow the researcher the
gathering of great quantity of useful data on the behaviors and actions of the
participant in a given setting. The observation chart was adapted and modified
from Greggio and Gil (2007).

33
 2.5.1. Student questionnaire Survey
As stated already, the target population for the present study was 8 th Grade
students from Escola do Ensino Secundrio Mandume. This questionnaire was
carefully designed in a way that it eschewed pupils potential to
misunderstanding it when it came to answering it and also permitted the
collected data to be relevant enough to the set aim of the paper.

2.5.1.1. Design of the questionnaire survey

This subsection looks at the Design of the questionnaire survey, which details
the way it was designed and the procedures taken.

2.5.1.2. Piloted Questionnaire

A pilot study was conducted with some pupils and teachers before
administering the final questionnaire whose feedback and after changes were
made in the wording, structure and instructions resulted into the final version.
This is detailed further in the subsequent section.

The questionnaire contained 21 questions divided into three groups (A, B and
C). The first group was made up of 3 questions regarding pupils background
information. The second group focused on the functions of code-switching, and
the last group required pupils to provide their opinions (attitudes they held)
about the use of English and Portuguese in classroom.

2.5.1.3. Final Questionnaire

Having done the pilot study, the final version of the questionnaire was
conceived. Some changes were made on the information table, wherever it is
aluno (s) used to be estudante (s). Also, the instructions in the background
information was circule por favor and then was changed to por favor ponha
um circulo. The phrase o uso alternado do Ingles e Portugus was added in
brackets to the phrase Funes da mudana de cdigo, in the title of group B
The wording of items 5, 6, 7 (group B) was replaced because of the word
equivalente which was thought to be difficult for pupils to understand. Item 5
used to be para dar o significado equivalente em Portugus and was
changed to para dar o significado do Ingls para o Portugus and the item 6
was para perguntar o (s) significado (s) equivalente (s) em Ingls and was

34
changed to para perguntar o (s) significado (s) do Portugus para o Ingls. In
the item 7 para perguntar acerca de regras gramaticais, the Word
gramaticais was changed to da gramtica.To the item 10 in group C, Fica-
me difcil aprender quando o professor no explica palavras novas, tpicos e
conceitos novos em Portugus was added the phrase sem Portugus in
brackets.

The number of questions changed; one more question in the first group was
added (Q4: Qual a lngua que voc mais usa em casa?).The types of
questions, as it was in the pilot stage were questions, open and close ended,
with likert scale items.

2.5.1.4. Procedures
Two weeks after the pilot stage and the completion of the final version of the
questionnaire, it was administered and distributed to 79 pupils in two different
periods, being morning and afternoon. The questionnaire was filled in the
classrooms in approximately twenty minutes, and all were returned (with one
inappropriately).

Researchers are, according to Creswell (2003), bound to have respect for the
rights, needs, values and desires of the informants, they should direct attention
to a number of ethical issues throughout the research and even at the end of it
(as cited in Cacumba, 2014, p. 118). Thus, I have taken some of these into
account: participants were given enough information about the research and
what it was required of them. They chose freely to take part in the study. Also,
they were assured that should they give any personal information, this would
strictly be kept secret. Regarding data collection, before the formal data
collection, ethical approval was obtained from ISCED-Huila. As soon as it was
obtained, I contacted the director of the school for their approval to conduct my
research at their school and approval was given orally. As to the results of the
study the utmost will be done to avoid any falsifications and/or misinterpretation
of data. That is, honesty will be given due value in this process (see Drnyei,
2007).

35
 2.5.2. Teacher Questionnaire
A teacher questionnaire was applied to four teachers who were available. It was
comprised of 18 questions divided into five groups (A, B, C, D, and E). Group A
sought to obtain teachers background information: question 1 enquired about
their sex; question 2 asked about their mother tongue; question 3 was about
their educational qualifications and questions 4 and 5 were about their teaching
and training experience, where they were asked to answer or circle. In Group B
teachers were asked to tick the occasions where they agreed Portuguese
should be used. In group C they were enquired to tick answer that most
accurately described their beliefs about the use of English and Portuguese in
the language classroom. In group D, a list of factors that teachers should
consider in their decision to code- or not to code-switch was provided and they
had to mark those applied to them and then rank them in order of importance
(having been given three scales: 1. The most important, 2. The second most
important and 3.The third most important. The last but in no way the least
teachers were to choose the three most important strategies they can sue to
avoid students overuse. The questions in the questionnaire were of different
types, likert scale questions and multiple choices.

2.5.2.1. Procedures
The teacher questionnaire was applied on the first week of May and because
they were busy with test and then marking it was left to them to return when
they had finished which was after three weeks. There was a table at the top of
the questionnaire explaining them the aim of the questionnaire and assuring
them of the secrecy of the data they should provide (See Appendix B).

2.5.3. Teacher Interview

As already mentioned somewhere in the paper, an interview was also
conducted and administered straightforwardly to two teachers who were
available. But due to their limited time they all opted to do it in written form. So,
it was given to them along with the questionnaire and returned it at the same
time.

The interview contained 8 questions based on Selamats (2014) interview, in

her thesis the use of code switching in Malaysian ESL classrooms, from where
36
I chose the ones directly related the aim of my paper. Question 1 was about
teachers opinion on the idea that code-switching is the best solution to address
the students language learning difficulties. In question 2 they had to comment
on the belief of exclusive use of English as held by some researchers. Question
3 enquired about their beliefs on the idea that code switching may result in
improper language use amongst students. Question 4 asked them to opine on
whether code switching will result in the overuse and overdependence on
students L1. Question 5 required that teachers gave the factors they considered
when using code-switching during English lessons. Question 6 asked whether
their code-switching use was spontaneous or pre-planned. Question 7 asked
them whether they encouraged their students to use English during lessons and
how they did it. The last question was about the advantages and disadvantages
of code switching in the ESL classroom.

2.5.3.1. Procedures
As mentioned above only two teachers were found available to be interviewed
to whom I explained the purpose of the study and what it required from them.
They took the interview questions at home which was done in written form and
returned it when they had finished. Now we are moving to the classroom
observation

2.5.4. Classroom observation

A classroom observation chart was also designed to collect data on classroom
practices of codes-witching by both teachers and pupils.

2.5.4.1. Pilot observation

Prior to this observation we conducted a pilot session with one teacher. From
that it was realized that some important items needed to be included. So we
had to readjust it.

2.5.4.2. Final Observation chart

The pilot observation chart was previously complied of 15 questions. After the
piloting the number increased to 24 items all of them about teachers and pupils
functions of code switching.

37
 2.5.4.3. Procedures
Prior to the actual observation sessions we consulted with the teachers and
explain the purpose of such. I entered the classroom with an observation sheet
and a recording device to get every instance teachers and pupils code-
switched. Except for one (Teacher A) all were observed twice (Teacher B and
C), two in the afternoon and one in the morning for 45 to 60 minutes. All of them
were male, since the female we were working with at the beginning gave her
class to a trainee from EF.F, who is in placement. One of them (Teacher A) is
doing year 4 at ISCED and has been teaching for 14 years. Another one is
doing 13 year at EFP (Teacher C) and the other has already finished EFP
(Teacher B). From the lessons observed we could see that all the teachers
used code-switching to some extent, although the beliefs of some, (for example
teacher C) seem to be against such a practice, as it was noticed during the
observation and some private talk. Their use of code-switching was sometimes
started by themselves and at other times by pupils, to attend to their needs and
doubts. The outcomes of the observation will be detailed below.

2.6. Results
The previous section aimed at describing the methods and procedures for the
data collection. Now in the present section the results obtained through those
methods will be described and detailed. As already said earlier, the
questionnaire was applied to 79 pupils who have all returned but one totally
inappropriately, thus it was cancelled and others with some vacancies were still
useful at some instances and for some questions. Below we describe the
results obtained from pupils questionnaire.

2.6.1. Pupils Background information

Question 1: What is your gender?

38
 Percentage

52 48

Male Female

Graph 1: Pupils gender

The graph above shows pupils gender.
As the diagram indicates, the majority of respondents (52%) are males, and the
minimal percentage (48%) is female.

Question 2: What is your age?

Age range Respondents Percentages
12-14 55 59,6%
15-17 24 30,4%
Total 79 100%
Table 1: Pupils age range
The table above describes pupils age range. As it shows, most pupils (59%)
ages range from 12-14 years old and the minority from 15-17.

Question 3: What is your mother tongue?

As revealed in the questionnaire, most pupils mother tongue and only a
minimum number varied from Umbundo, Nyaneka and Cokwe.

Question 4: What language do you use the most in your home?

Regarding the language pupils use the most in their homes all of them said they
used Portuguese the most.

2.6.2. Teachers Background information

Question 1: What is your gender?

Female Male
50% 50%

Diagram 1: Teachers gender

The above diagram shows the gender of teacher participants.
As it can be read, one half (50%) are females and the other half (50%) are
males respectively.

39
Question 2: What is your mother tongue?
Three of the respondents, corresponding to 75% have Portuguese as their
mother tongue and only 25%, which is one participant has Umbundo as the
mother tongue.

Question 3: What is your educational qualification?

One of the respondents (25%) has a Licenciatura degree in Linguistics English,
other 25%, which is one participant is qualified with the fourth year of English
and the two other respondents, which amount to 50% have only got a 12th
grade in Linguistics English.

Question 4: How long have you been teaching English?

Years of experience Respondents Percentage
1-4 years 2 50%
5-9 years 1 25%
10-14 years 1 25%
15-19 years 0 0%
More than 20 0 0%
Table 4: Teachers teaching experience
Table 4 describes teachers teaching experience

As shown in table one above, the majority (50%) of the respondents have been
teaching English for 1-4 years, while other 50% is divided by the other two
respondents, one being, from 5-9 years old and the other from 10-14 years old,

Question 5: Where have you been trained to Teach English?

2.5
2
1.5
1 Teachers' Training Institution
0.5
0
ISCED EFP BOTH NONE

Graph 2: Teachers Training Institution

The graph above is about teachers English training institution.
We can observe that one has been trained at both ISCED and EFP, one at
Factors that govern teachers decision to code or not to codeswitch. ISCED
only while the other two, corresponding to have been trained at EFP.

40
 2.6.3. Functions of code switching
The first research question asked What are the functions of code switching
at Escola do I Ciclo Mandume according to pupils and teachers? Data
from the questionnaire, interview (only for teachers) and classroom observation
were used to answer this question.

2.6.3.1. Results from pupil questionnaire

YES NO I DO NOT KNOW
STATEMENTS
N of % N of % N of %
subjects subjects subjects
1 I use Portuguese when I am 61 79,2 6 7,8 10 13%
unable to express myself in % %
English
2 I use Portuguese to help me 47 61% 24 31,2 6 7,8%
maintain the flow of %
conversation
3 I use Portuguese to 65 83% 7 9% 6 8%
communicate with my peers who
share who speak also
Portuguese
4 I use Portuguese to explain 67 86% 5 6% 6 8%
difficult words and sentences to
my peers
5 I use to provide equivalent 59 75,6% 9 11.5 10 12,8%
meaning(s) in Portuguese %
6 I use to provide equivalent 59 75,6% 9 11.5 10 12,8%
meaning(s) in Portuguese %
7 I use Portuguese to ask 50 65,8% 12 15,8 14 18,4%
equivalent meaning(s) in English %
8 I use Portuguese to ask about 60 81% 10 14% 4 5%
grammatical rules and structures

Table 2: Occasions where pupils believe Portuguese should be used

The above table describes the situations in which pupils believe Portuguese can
be used in English language classrooms.

As depicted by the table, the five most important occasions where pupils believe
they should code-switch are: To explain difficult words and sentences (86%), to
communicate with peers who also speak Portuguese (83%), to ask about
grammatical rules and structures (81%) when they are unable to express
themselves in English (79,2%) and to provide equivalent meaning in
Portuguese (75%).

41
 2.6.3.2. Results from the teacher questionnaire
YES NO DO NOT
KNOW
STATEMENTS N of % N of % N of %
subjs. subj. subj.
a) To mark the beginning of class 4 100% 0 0% 0 0%
b) To get the learners attention 1 25% 3 75% 0 0%
c) To check for comprehension 2 50% 2 50% 0 0%
d) To organize classroom tasks 3 75% 0 0% 1 25%
e) To introduce unfamiliar materials/ 3 75% 1 25% 0 0%
topics
f) To maintain classroom discipline 0 0% 3 75% 1 25%
g) To provide praise/feedback/personal 2 50% 2 50% 0 0%
remarks about students performance
h) To encourage students participation 1 25% 3 75% 0 0%
in classroom activities
i) To reduce students anxiety 3 75% 0 0% 1 25%
j) To increase students motivation and 2 50% 2 50% 0 0%
confidence in learning English
k) To provide equivalent meaning (s) in L1 3 75% 1 25% 0 0%
to translate vocabulary
l) To give advice 3 75% 1 25% 0 0%
m) To elicit vocabulary and grammatical 2 50% 2 50% 0 0%
structures
n) To call the learners attention to the 0 0% 3 75% 1 25%
correct pronunciation for sounds in
English
o) To bring about humorous effects 2 50% 2 50% 0 0%
Table 5: Occasions where teachers believe they should code-switch
The above table describes the occasions where teachers believe they can
code-switch. As we can observe, the most frequent occasions where teachers
believe they can use Portuguese are to mark the beginning of class (100%), to
organize classroom tasks to introduce unfamiliar materials/ topics, to provide
equivalent meaning (s) in L1 to translate vocabulary, to reduce students anxiety
in learning English, to give advice (75%)

2.6.3.3. Results from teacher semi-structured interview

Here we present the results from the semi-structured teacher interview for the
questions related to the functions of code-switching by teachers. We give the
question and then the answer.

Question 2: Most ELT practitioners, education experts and policy makers are
strong advocates of the exclusive use of English during the teaching and
learning process (code switching is a practice which is discouraged or even
prohibited/proscribed). What are your thoughts on this belief?

Teacher A: My thoughts on this belief are that when teaching grammar for
beginners its necessary to use code switching sometimes.
42
Teacher B: I disagree with this opinion. I think that it is important to get learners
motivated to the lesson because when they do not understand the lesson it is
boring.

2.6.3.4. Results from pupil classroom observation

This subsection details the results obtained from the classroom observation on
the functions of code-switching by pupils from the two classes observed. Below
are the instances where pupils code-switched in classroom. At times started by
them and other times prompted by the teachers

To provide equivalent meaning

For this function, at times the teacher (teacher B) encouraged his pupils to look
for words up in a bilingual dictionary. Also, as in the example below, teacher A,
wanting to check pupils comprehension invites them to give the meaning of I
can which they did.
T: (asking the class) what does it mean I can?
C: eu posso
T: eu posso. Eu consigo. E can't?
C: Eu no consigo, no posso.

To express themselves
Pupils, in all lessons, most of the times addressed the teacher in Portuguese,
being unable to express themselves in English. This is shown in the following
excerpt during correction of the test when a pupil wanted to complain about his
test
P: Teacher, eu quero reclamar
T: I know you want. You have to wait

Another instance the teacher asked a pupil about his dictionary, where he had
bought it and the pupil could not answer it but in Portuguese. You can see it
below
T: Where did you buy it? (the dictionary)
P: Meu primo quem me deu
T: Oh, your cousin!

In teacher C lesson on describing people, we see this function in the example

below:
T: class, you know old?
C: (silence)
43
 P: professor, no pode s falar um pouco de Portugus? No estou
a perceber quase nada

This pupil could not understand almost anything the teacher was saying for he
rarely used Portuguese. So, he expressed his concern in the way above.

To talk to peers
Apart from using Portuguese most of the times to address the teacher, they also
used it every time they spoke to their peers, as they all spoke Portuguese

To clarify understanding
Another instance was when a pupil used Portuguese to check understanding
about things he was having trouble with (about describing people). As he began
to understand other things he wanted to check whether his understanding on
other things were right or not, which is demonstrated below
Pp: Ento, tall alto n professor

Another instance was where the teacher was explaining (and demonstrating
with a bag in his hand) they should write five objects they could put in their bags
and five they couldnt, then the conversation goes,
T: Do you understand?
C: (silence)
T: (repeats) do you understand?
P: professor, para escrever 5 objectos que entram na pasta?

Translate difficult phrases and/or sentences in Portuguese

I could also observe and record an instance when Portuguese was used by a
pupil to translate difficult sentences to a peer about the homework which was
for them to describe themselves What are you like?. This is shown below:
Pp1: Professor, no entendi
Pp2: para dizer como que voc . Se s baixa, alta, magra

2.6.4. Results from teacher classroom observation

Below we list the functions they used and where possible provide examples of
such instances:
To teach grammar
Two teachers (A, B) were observed to use Portuguese to refer to grammar
aspects during their lessons. Teacher A, for example, talking about classroom

44
objects, used it to refer to the grammatical aspects of the verb find as seen
below:
T: what objects can you find in the classroom? (Then he goes on to say) Find
um verbo irregular que significa encontrar, achar. Ele tem vrios significados de
acordo com o contexto.

Teacher B also used it to revise his previous lesson on abilities and possibilities,
during correction of the test:
T: "Ento, quando falamos de 'abilities' e 'possibilities' usamos o verbo can tal
como 'abilities' no passado, ma o verbo no passado; na negativa usamos o can't +
(inaudible)

To translate sentences and Phrases

All the teachers used Portuguese for this function. As seen in the excerpt below
by teacher A, when teaching new structure to his pupils who could not
understand it:
T: The question is: what are the objects that you can find in the classroom?
C: (seemed not to understand)
T: It means quais so os objectos que podemos encontrar na sala de aulas?

Teacher B also used it for the same function in his lesson about the human
body when checking pupils understanding of new vocabulary. Below is an
excerpt:
T: What is the function of the mouth?
C: (silence)
T: O que fizemos com a boca?
Pp: comer
T: eat (he says it demonstrating)

Provide equivalent meaning in L1

Portuguese to provide equivalent meaning in L1 was used by teacher A and C.
For instance, in the example below pupils asked for the meaning of the word
that in a lesson about classroom objects and the teacher went on to translate it
in Portuguese:
Pp: Teacher, o que signifca that?
T: (answers) pode ser um pronome demonstrativo, mas aqui significa 'que' e put
significa pr, colocar.

At another instance where a certain pupil had difficulties understanding the

meaning of old and young even with the drawings the teacher had on the
board, he had to use it to translate these words to her.

Ask for equivalent meaning in English

45
Apart from using Portuguese to provide equivalent meaning in L1, teachers also
used it to ask for equivalent meaning in English. That is, from Portuguese to
English. This is seen below in the example by teacher C when talking about
school vacations.
T: How do you say fui in English?
C: went
T: Ok, vo usar o verbo go no past

To check pupils comprehension

Teacher A, wanting to make sure pupils understood what they were to talk
about used Portuguese to check their comprehension by asking the equivalent
meaning of classroom ( so, this example is also applicable above)
T: class we are talking about classroom objects, ok? Classroom o qu?
C: sala de aula.

To give instructions
Only one teacher (B) used Portuguese to give instruction during one of his
when revising the use of can for abilities and possibilities and this is illustrated
below:
Vejam onde erraram e vo voltar a fazer a composio. Vo ver a matria que ns
falamos sobra abilities e possibilities com o verbo can e corrijam a composio
(inaudible) you have six minutes.

To give advice
This was also used by one teacher, A once to tell his learners that they should
study hard and investigate more for themselves if they are to pass and not
depend on the teacher only.

provide remarks about pupils performance and feedback

Code-switching was also used by one of the teachers (A) during freer practice,
to provide remark about a pupils performance. Here is a sample of a role-play
Pp1: What objects can you find in the classroom?
Pp2: (answers slowly) the objects
T: (interrupts) Alto. Tem de falar alto. Os outros no esto a ouvir.

Teacher B and C also did it during individual work but it would not be captured
by the recording

Encourage participation in classroom activities

46
A clear example of this is the excerpt below, by teacher A. The teacher had
commanded his pupils to work in pairs and set them. Then there is this
conversation:
Pp: (talking about his peer) Teacher, ela disse que no vou conseguir.
T: (speaking to that pupil) voc no pode dizer que no vai conseguir. Voc tem de
tentar. Eu no posso dizer que no sei quando ainda no tenteiTenta primeiro.

Apparently this pupil saw herself unable to carry out the task given by the
teacher and she did not want to participate, so the teacher used Portuguese to
encourage her in taking part of the set task

Another example is by teacher C, by using Portuguese he was waiting and

inviting for pupils to take part in it which actually happened
T: do you know what describing people in Portuguese?
C: (silence)
T: Describing people? (Emphasizing the word people)
Pp: Pessoa
T: descrever (Inviting and waiting pupils to continue)
C: pessoas

2.6.4. Attitudes towards code switching

The second question was What, according to pupils and teachers, are the
attitudes towards code switching at Escola Mandume?

Data from the questionnaires and interview were used to answer this question.
So, below will be detailed the results from pupil questionnaire and teacher
questionnaire and semi-structured interview.

2.6.4.1. Results from pupils questionnaire

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always
ITEMS N of % N of % N of % N of % N of %
resp. resp. resp. resp. resp.
1. The use of 10 13,7 7 9,6 17 23% 10 13.7 29 40
Portuguese by the % % % %
teacher helps me to
enjoy the lesson
2. The use of 6 8% 4 6% 16 21% 16 21% 33 44
Portuguese by the %
teacher students
understand the helps
lesson better
3. The use of 10 14 7 9% 19 26% 10 14% 27 37
Portuguese by the % %
teacher makes me feel
more confident and
motivated in learning
English
4. The use of 8 10,4 8 10,4 17 22% 19 24,7 25 32,5
Portuguese use by the % % % %

47
 teacher encourages me
to actively participate in
classroom activities
ITEMS Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always
N of % N of % N of % N of % N of %
resp. resp. resp. resp. resp.
5. I prefer the teacher to 35 50% 3 4, 16 22,9 8 11,4 8 11,4
use English only during 3% % % %
lessons and not to use
Portuguese
6.I prefer the teacher to 17 24% 8 11% 18 25% 13 18% 16 22
minimize the use of my %
first language during
lessons
7. I prefer the teacher to 5 7% 7 9% 16 21% 10 13% 37 50
use both English and %
Portuguese during
lessons
8. Pupils dislike it when 27 37% 10 14% 19 26% 9 13% 7 10
the teacher uses %
Portuguese during
English lessons
9. I find it difficult to 9 14% 6 9% 16 25% 6 9% 28 43
learn when the teacher %
does not explain new
words/topics/concepts
in Portuguese
10. I have a difficulty to 16 21,6 5 6,8 12 16,2 11 14,9 30 40,5
concentrate during % % % % %
English lessons when
the teacher uses
English only
Table 3: Attitudes towards code-switching according to pupils
As the table reads, the majority of pupils have a positive attitude towards code-
switching by the teacher in the classroom.

The highest percentage of pupils holds a positive opinion about codes-witching.

In fact, regarding statement 1. Most pupils believe that their teachers code
switching always, often or sometimes helps them me to enjoy the lesson. This
makes the total of 76.7% while only 23.3% report it to never or hardly ever so
be their case. Regarding statement 2. Most pupils (86%) state that they
understand the lesson better when their teacher uses Portuguese, being 14% of
them on the opposite side. As shown by the percentage of statement 3. The use
of Portuguese by the teacher makes me feel more confident and motivated in
learning English, most students (77%) stated that it is always, sometimes or
often their case while it is never or hardly ever for the minority (23%).Statement
4 reads: The use of Portuguese use by the teacher encourages me to actively
participate in classroom activities, and again, most pupils (79%) feel it is no with
them while it is never or hardly ever for the rest (21%). Statement 5 also shows
the majority with a positive attitude, that is, they never or hardly ever prefer the
48
teacher to use English only during lessons and not to use Portuguese. These
accounts for 54.3% while the other 45.7% prefer it always, often or sometimes.

As to statement 8, the majority report that they the prefer the teacher to
minimize the use of their first language during lessons, which accounts for 65%
while the other 35% either never or hardly ever prefer it to be so. Regarding
statement 8.the vast majority of pupils, accounting for 51% never or hardly ever
dislike it when the teacher uses Portuguese during English lessons while 49%
either prefer it always, often or sometimes. Statement 9 reads: I find it difficult to
learn when the teacher does not explain new words/topics/concepts in
Portuguese. This is true for the majority with 77% while never or hardly ever for
23% of pupils. Lastly, statement 10. I have a difficulty to concentrate during
English lessons when the teacher uses English only reflects the case of the
majority who say that they have this difficulty always, often or sometimes this
accounts for 71.6% of them.

2.6.4.2. Results from teacher questionnaire

Strongly Disagree Do not Agree Strongly
Disagree Know Agree
STATEMENTS N of % N of % N of % N % N of %
resp. resp. resp. of resp.
resp
.
1. Code switching will 0 0% 2 50% 0 0% 2 50 0 0%
facilitate the language %
learning process
2. The practice of 0 0% 3 75% 1 50 0 0% 0 0%
code switching will %
increase the students
reliance and
dependency on the
teacher
3. Code switching 0 0% 2 50% 0 0% 2 50 0 0%
should be included as %
an integral part of the
ESL lesson
4. There should be a 0 0% 2 50% 0 0% 2 50 0 0%
strict separation of the %
mother tongue and
English in the ESL
classroom
5. Code switching 0 0% 1 25% 0 0% 3 75 0 0%
should only be used %
as a last resort when
all other options have
been exhausted
6. Code switching is 0 0% 1 25% 2 50 1 25 0 0%
an efficient, time- % %
saving technique.
7. English is best 1 25% 1 25% 2 50 0 0% 0 0%
taught in English-only %
49
 classrooms

STATEMENTS Strongly Disagree Do not Agree Strongly

Disagree Know Agree
N of % N of % N of % N % N of %
resp. resp. resp. of resp.
resp
.

8. The ideal teacher is 1 25% 2 50% 1 25 0 0%

a native speaker %
9. The more English 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% 1 25 1 25%
that is used, the better %
the results for the
learner
Table 6: Attitudes towards code-switching according to teachers
The above table describes teachers attitudes towards the use of code-
switching in classroom.

From the results displayed in the table above, we can observe a balanced view
regarding statements 1. Code switching will facilitate the language learning
process, 3. Code switching should be included as an integral part of the ESL
lesson, 4. There should be a strict separation of the mother tongue and English
in the ESL classroom and with one half of the respondents who agree and the
other (50%) who disagree with the statements. Also statements 7. English is
best taught in English-only classrooms where we have one half (50%) who
agree and the other half (50%) varying from disagree and strongly disagree and
9. The more English that is used, the better the results for the learner where
one half which account for 50% strongly disagree and the other half (50%) who
agree or agree.

As to statement 2. We see that the majority of teachers corresponding to 75%

have rejected the idea that The practice of code switching will increase the
students reliance and dependency on the teacher. In fact they disagree with
the statement while 25%, i.e. the minority takes a neutral position. Statement 5.
Reads that Code switching should only be used as a last resort when all other
options have been exhausted. As shown by the table, most subjects agree with
the statement. This accounts for 75% of them against 25% who take the
opposite view. Regarding statement 6, respondents are divided into 25% who
disagree, 50% who do not know and 25% who agree that English is best taught
in English-only classrooms. Lastly, regarding statement 8, only the minority

50
believe that The ideal teacher is a native speaker. This accounts for 25%
whereas most of them (75%) disagree with it.

2.6.4.3. Results from teacher semi-structured interview

This subsection presents the results from the semi-structured interview related
to attitudes towards code switching by teachers.
Question 1: Based on your personal experience, do you think code switching is
the best solution to address the students language learning
difficulties?

Teacher A: To some extent, yes, especially where full classes or overloaded

are concerned and when theres lack of wall chart facilities.
Teacher B: I think so, because every foreign language needs to be taught in a
language which learners speak in their context.

Question 3: Many language experts have expressed concerns about using

code switching in the ESL classroom as it is believed to result in
improper language use amongst students. What are your thoughts
on this belief?
Teacher A: If you overuse code switching, learners become lazy at learning
second language. So it is better to use alternative solutions such as
the use of flashcards, group and pair work, etc.
Teacher B: I do not agree with this idea because code-switching is to help
students learn a second language like English

Question 4: Do you think that code switching will result in the overuse and
overdependence on the students native language?
Teacher A: Yes, I do think so but the teacher can avoid it to happen by using
exclusively English in some topics.
Teacher B: No. I dont think so.

Question 6: Do you use code switching spontaneously and naturally when

youre teaching or you come up with a plan on when code switching
will be used throughout the lesson.
Teacher A: I use it spontaneously when teaching but the lesson plan doesnt
necessarily involve the learners mother tongue.
51
Teacher B: I usually use code switching spontaneously.

Question 8: What are the advantages or disadvantages of using code switching

in the ESL classroom?
Teacher A: Advantages are the rapid understanding among others and
disadvantage is the laziness of some students to learn English for
themselves.
Teacher B: I realize there are more advantages than disadvantages of using
code switching in the classroom. I think it is the best way to teach
English to students.

2.6.5. Factors that govern teachers decisions regarding code-switching

use
The Research third question enquired What factors govern teachers
decision regarding code-switching use at Escola do I Ciclo Mandume?
To answer this question, data from the questionnaire and interview were used

2.6.5.1. Results from the questionnaire

Top three factors N of The most The 2nd The 3rd most
subjects important most important
important
1. Students levels 1 1 0 0
2. Students abilities 3 2 1 0
3. L1 and L2 differences 1 0 2 0
4. Teaching methods 0 0 0 0
5. Lesson content 1 0 0 1
6. Learners behavior 0 0 0 0
7. Learners attitudes towards 1 0 1 0
L1 or L2
8. Learners proficiency 1 0 1 0
9. Types of classroom 3 1 0 2
activities
10. Other (please specify) 0 0 0 0
Table 7: Factors teachers consider in order to code- or not to code-switch
Table 7 reveals the most important factors teachers consider in order to code-
or not to code-switch. As it can be read, these factors are: the first most
important is students abilities, the second most important types of activities
and the third most important is students levels.

2.6.5.2. Results from the semi-structured interview

Here we present the results from the teacher semi-structured interview related
to the factors that govern teachers decision to code- or not to code-switch.

52
Question 5: What are the factors which you consider when using code
switching during English lessons?
Teacher A: I consider the learners background, the classroom facilities, the
learners native language or mother tongue and others.
Teacher B: One of the factors I consider, English is a foreign language and
students are starting to get familiar with that

2.6.6. Strategies that teachers should use to avoid pupils overuse of

code-switching
The fourth research question four was What Strategies do teachers use to
avoid pupils overuse of code-switching? Data used to answer this
question comes from the questionnaire and interview.

2.6.6.1. Results from the questionnaire

Strategies N of Percentages
subjects
1. Talk to them about the issue 0 0%
2. Encourage them to use English appropriately 2 50%
3. Only respond to English use 0 0
4. Create an English environment by getting them to 2 50%
pretend to be English speakers
5. Discuss with them the value of using the L2 in class 2 50%
6. Make L2 an unavoidable part of the task 2 50%
7. Suggest solutions to encourage L2 use and present 0 0%
reasons why they should avoid using the L2
8. Set up a monitoring system to remind learners to use 0 0%
the L2
9. Choose manageable tasks that are within their 0 0%
proficiency
10. Pre-teach the language items and skills needed 0 0%
11. Repeat tasks to make them easier 3 75%
12. Inform them of the learning goals of each task and use 0 0%
non-threatening tasks.
13. Other (please specify) 0 0
Table 8: Teachers most used strategies to avoid Pupils L1 overuse
Table 8 shows the strategies teachers use to overcome pupils L1 overuse. As
we can observe, the three most used strategies are number 11. Repeat tasks to
make them easier, number 2. Encourage them to use English appropriately,
number 4. Create an English environment by getting them to pretend to be
English speakers, number 5. Discuss with them the value of using the L2 in
class and number 6. Make L2 an unavoidable part of the task.

53
 2.6.6.2. Results from teacher semi-structured interview
Here we present the results from the teacher semi-structured interview related
to the strategies teachers use to overcome code-switching overuse.

Question 7. Do you encourage your students to use English during lessons?

How do you do so?
Teacher A: Yes, that is my aim although I use code switching encouraging
learners for English only is necessary.
Teacher B: Yes, I do. During lessons I always elicit my students to practice
their English in order to improve more and more.

2.7. Limitations and Delimitations of the study

Limitations
As with every research, ours is not perfect, rather it presents some limitations
regarding the research instruments, participants and time constraints.

Concerning the research instruments, a questionnaire was the only source to

obtain data from pupil regarding their attitudes towards code-switching. Maybe,
if it was combined with another, could be crosschecked in order to verify the
truthfulness of their opinions. As to teacher questionnaire a question remains to
be answered and this is whether teachers really use the strategies to avoid
pupils overuse of code-switching they have chosen. This may be solved by
including those in the interview questions and ask them which strategies they
actually and really use. Another limitation here is that we did not include in the
instruments a question to ask teachers at Escola Mandume about the useful
applications of code-switching, which we only found it relevant when the project
was already near its completion.

There are also some limitations with the sample population/participants in that
only two teacher participants were interviewed due to their unavailability, also
with classroom observation where only three teachers were observed. As it
might have yielded different results so, it may not accurately reflect the opinions
of all participants.

54
Still regarding participants, though I explained to them the purpose of the
research they thought I was going to evaluate them which might have
influenced their behavior and thus may not reflect their typical code switching
practices

With regards to classroom observation, unbeknownst to me, at the appointed

day for the observation, participants who we were working with at the beginning
was unavailable to continue as gave her class to a trainee in placement. So, we
had to continue with this teacher. This might affect the consistency of the results

Regarding time constraints, participants were busy with marking tests at the
time which is a tiring work, and would not participate in the study at first. May
have affected their responses which otherwise would have been different. The
same happened with the interview questions which had to be conducted in
written form. As a result, some responses were vague and off topic as there
was no opportunity for interactions and thus for clarification of possible
ambiguity in the questions and probing for more information. Lastly, the time
devoted to classroom observation was not enough to draw solid conclusions
regarding their classroom practices. In this case a long-term classroom
observation should be conducted for a greater validity and reliability of the
research.

Delimitations
The present study was delimited to its purpose which is exploring the use of
code-switching at Escola do I Ciclo do Ensino Secundrio Mandume
having as the research questions,
(1) What are the functions of code switching at Escola do I Ciclo Mandume
according to pupils and teachers?
(2) What, according to pupils and teachers, are the attitudes towards code
switching at Escola Mandume?
(3) What factors govern teachers decision regarding code-switching use at
Escola do I Ciclo Mandume?
(4) What strategies do teachers at Escola do I Ciclo Mandume use to avoid
pupils overuse of code-switching

55
So that the manageability of the data collected would be secured, three
research instruments were chosen, being: i. Questionnaire for teachers and
pupils (RQs 14), ii. Semi-structured interview for teachers (RQs 14) iii.
Classroom observation chart teachers and pupils (RQ 2) and applied to a
number of 78 pupils and 5 teachers from 8th grade classes at Escola do Ensino
Secundrio do I Ciclo n 76 Mandume. Due to the large population we opted to
work with 8th grade teachers and pupils only, from morning and afternoon
periods, teachers 5 teachers and 8 and 78 pupils. Due to the limited population
and scope, as well as unique context, the results obtained from this research
cannot be generalized to different contexts, but be restricted to its own context.

Conclusion
The focal point of this chapter was the description of the research methodology
applied to achieve the objective for this study. To achieve such an aim it was
divided into two main sections, that is (1) description of the methodology and (2)
the report of the results obtained from the research. In this chapter are
presented the results obtained from the questionnaire, interview and classroom
observation which could not be achieved if it were not for the participants, to
who goes my deepest gratitude. The results are grouped into: 1) functions of
code-switching, 2) attitudes towards code switching, 3) Factors that govern
teachers decisions regarding code switching use and 4) strategies to avoid
pupils overuse of code-switching.

Regarding the functions, through the questionnaire and classroom observation,

pupils were found to code-switch mainly to explain difficult words and sentences
and/or provide equivalent meaning, to communicate with peers who also speak
Portuguese, to ask about grammatical rules and structures and to express
themselves. Being the most used in classroom (as shown by the observation) to
communicate with peers who also speak Portuguese which was used every
time and when unable to express themselves in English (to address the
teacher) used almost every time and the least used was to explain difficult
words and sentences to peers contrary to their answers in the questionnaire
where the most used were to explain difficult words and sentences (86%), to

56
communicate with peers who also speak Portuguese (83%) and the least used
was provide equivalent meaning in Portuguese.

And as to the functions according to teachers, through the questionnaires and

observation, we came to found that teachers use code-switching to some
degree but not in every occasion. They use it mainly: to mark the beginning of
class, organize classroom tasks (classroom management), to introduce
unfamiliar materials/ topics, to provide equivalent meaning (s) in L1/to translate
vocabulary (curriculum access), to give advice, to reduce students anxiety in
learning English, to give advice (to maintain interpersonal relations).

Related to attitudes towards classroom code-switching, from the results

obtained through the questionnaire (and classroom observation), we can say
that pupils tend towards an overall positive attitude of code-switching
acknowledging its benefits as a facilitating teaching and learning tool. However
there seems to be some reservations about it for a greater part of them tend to
believe in English only classroom and the majority want their L1 to be
minimized.

Regarding teachers attitudes, through the results from the questionnaire and
interview, we can say that teachers tend towards an overall positive attitude
towards code-switching. However there seem to be some reservations as they
also believe there are some counterproductive aspects of it.

As to the factors taken into account for teachers decisions regarding code
switching, we have come to find out, through the questionnaire and interview we
have administered, that teachers decisions regarding code-switching are
governed by the types of activities, students background (including their levels,
abilities and mother tongue) and classroom conditions (e.g., the presence or
absence of classroom facilities and wall charts).

Regarding the strategies teachers use to avoid pupils overuse of code-

switching, the most used strategies, as chosen by the teachers, are: to repeat
tasks to make them easier, encourage them to use English appropriately, create
an English environment by getting them to pretend to be English speakers,
discuss with them the value of using the L2 in class and make L2 an
57
unavoidable part of the task. Other strategies are the use of pair work, group
work, flashcards and English only use in some topics.

These results will be discussed further on the next chapter. By now, despite its
limitations, we can say that this study contains enough and relevant data to the
problem we have set.

58
CHAPTER THREE: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
 CHAPTER THREE: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
3.0. Introduction
The preceding chapter was mainly concerned with the research methodology
employed in the present study, mainly it was to display results obtained through
the instruments applied. This chapter will aim at its discussion and interpretation
having our research purpose Exploring the use of code-switching at Escola
do I Ciclo do Ensino Secundrio Mandume in mind. For this to be achieved
we are first going to restate the research questions and second to analyze and
discuss the results obtained from the four research questions, being:
(5) What are the functions of code switching at Escola do I Ciclo Mandume
according to pupils and teachers?
(6) What, according to pupils and teachers, are the attitudes towards code
switching at Escola Mandume?
(7) What factors govern teachers decision regarding code-switching use at
Escola do I Ciclo Mandume?
(8) What strategies do teachers at Escola do I Ciclo Mandume use to avoid
pupils overuse of code-switching?

This leads us to the actual analysis and discussion of the results obtained
through the questionnaires, interview and classroom observation.

3.1. Functions of code-switching

The first research questions was What are the functions of code switching
at Escola do I Ciclo Mandume according to pupils and teachers?

3.1.1. Functions of code switching according to pupils

In analyzing pupil questionnaire the results shows that the main occasions
where pupils tend to use Portuguese (given in order according to the highest
percentage to the lowest) are: to explain difficult words and sentences (86%), to
communicate with peers who also speak Portuguese (83%), to ask about
grammatical rules and structures (81%) when they are unable to express
themselves in English (79, 2%) and to provide equivalent meaning in
Portuguese (75%). All these functions except to ask about grammatical rules
and structures were present in some degree in classroom observation which

58
show consistency in the results for the most part differing only in the frequency
of use in that the most used by pupils in classroom were to communicate with
peers who also speak Portuguese which was used every time, when unable to
express themselves in English (to address the teacher) used almost every time
and the least used was to explain difficult words and sentences to peers.
However we cannot know for sure if this is always consistent in classroom
practices due to the limited observation we have undertaken.

The above results corroborate those by Greggio and Gil (2007) who found that
pupils used Portuguese to maintain the flow of conversation, to fill a linguistic
gap, to provide equivalent meaning(s) in to ask equivalent meaning(s) to ask
about grammatical rules and structures and to clarify understanding of
grammatical rules and structures. Similar results were also found by Selamat
(2014) where pupils code-switched when they had difficulties to express
themselves in the target language, when interacting with peers who share the
same language them, to maintain the flow of conversation and to explain
difficult words and sentences to their peers.

3.1.2. Functions of code switching according to teachers

For this question we have also used questionnaire and classroom observation.
The results from this are going to be analyzed here.

We can start by declaring that our two instruments show that teachers at Escola
Mandume use code switching to some degree although some tend to have
some reservations (see more in the next subsections). So, from the
questionnaire results (cf. Table 3) one can see that the teachers do not agree
that they can use Portuguese in every occasion. And they hold a balanced view
regarding its use (where half believe it can be used and the other half do not) to
check for comprehension, increase students motivation and confidence in
learning English, provide praise/feedback/personal remarks about students
performance, elicit vocabulary and grammatical structures, to bring about
humorous effects and encourage students participation in classroom activities
(only found in the classroom observation). However all agree that it is used to
mark the beginning of class (100%), to organize classroom tasks (75%), to
introduce unfamiliar materials/ topics (75%), to provide equivalent meaning (s)
59
in L1/to translate vocabulary (75%); to reduce students anxiety in learning
English, to give advice (75%).

These fall under the three categories by Ferguson (2009, in Selamat 2014) that
is, classroom management: to mark the beginning of class and to organize
classroom tasks; curriculum access: to introduce unfamiliar materials/ topics, to
provide equivalent meaning (s) in L1/to translate vocabulary elicit vocabulary
and grammatical structures, and to maintain interpersonal relations: to reduce
students anxiety in learning English, to give advice.

These results are in some way consistent to those found by Greggio and Gil
(2007) who, for example found that teachers code-switched for functions as: to
facilitate or clarify understanding of grammatical rules and structures, provide
equivalent meaning/translate vocabulary and mark the beginning of the class
and to give advice, Gulzar (2010) who found: giving effective instruction,
checking understanding and translation, Magid and Mughadam (2013) who
found teachers code switching useful to: explain meaning and new vocabulary,
translation, illustrating grammatical rules, organizing classrooms, praising and
encouraging students, Selamat (2014) who found the following: explain
meaning of words and sentences, to explain difficult sentences, explain
grammatical rules, check for comprehension, to introduce unfamiliar materials
and topics, to reduce students' anxiety and increase motivation and confidence
in learning English, to encourage students participation in the classroom and
Yataanbaba (2015) who found asking equivalents, translation, giving
instruction, classroom management purposes (maintain discipline). Being
translation/providing equivalents found in all studies.

3.2. Attitudes towards code switching

The second research question was What, according to pupils and teachers
are the attitudes towards code switching at Escola Mandume?

3.2.1. Attitudes towards code switching according to pupils

In analyzing the pupil questionnaire (the only instrument for this question), we
can come to assert that the majority of pupils at Escola Mandume tend towards

60
a positive attitude of code switching in classroom. However there appears to be
some reservations about it, as it will be seen below.

Findings show that greater part of pupils (76.7%) shares the sentiment that the
use of Portuguese by their teacher helps them to enjoy the lesson, although in
varying degrees. This goes along the same lines with their feelings that the use
of Portuguese helps them understand the lesson better, as the majority (83%)
also asserts. Most of them have also reported, though in different degrees the
positive effect of code switching on increasing their motivation and confidence,
as 77% of them said that their teachers use of Portuguese makes them
confident and motivated in learning English which is consistent with another
sentiment by 79, 2% of them that the use of their L1 by the teacher encourages
them to actively participate in classroom activities. Still the vast majority of
pupils which accounts for 84% state that they prefer the teacher to use both
English and Portuguese during lessons. Most of them (77%) have also
expressed their difficulties when the teacher does not explain new
words/topics/concepts in Portuguese and added to this they stated English only
practices made it difficult to concentrate, this is shared by 71% of them.

All these show consistency in their responses and are similar to the ones by
Selamat (2014). The only difference is in terms of percentages. However there
are some inconsistencies on some points, as seen below.

Regarding positive attitudes, Kim and Petraki (2009) also found similar results
in that there was an overwhelming agreement and evidence on the use and
benefit of L1. Their findings revealed that L1 plays a supportive role in the
language classroom, especially in the early stages and more significantly in
writing and reading. Also, it provides a more comfortable and motivating
environment as we have also found that most pupils feel more confident and
motivated in learning as well as encouraged to participate in classroom
activities which also corroborates a study by Schweers (1999) L1 can have a
supportive and facilitative role (in Tang 2002, p. 41, in Kim and Petraki 2009)
in EFL although English should be the primary vehicle of communication
Schweers (1999, in Kim and Petraki 2009).

61
However there are also some negative views which apparently show some
discrepancies in their beliefs. For instance when asked if they prefer their
teacher to use only English during lessons, the majority said that they never or
rarely prefer it (54.3%) while 45, 7% of them prefer English only always, often or
sometimes. However we can see that the percentage of pupils who have a
positive attitude in the statements above dropped from a minimum of 71% to
54.3% making a great part of them supporting English only teaching which
seems to show a discrepancy of 26% of the majority of those who said English
Only use makes it difficult for them to concentrate. This may be explained by
suggesting that some might have meant this not to be the case every time and
maybe with some topics and activities only, not with all (seeing that only 11, 4%
out of 45.7% said it was so, always). Selamat also found similar results where a
great part, that is half of students (50%) were for English only teaching.

Along the same lines, 65% of them which is the majority said that they prefer
the teacher to minimize the use of their first language during lessons. This
seems to indicate that most pupils tend towards a positive view of code-
switching, yes, but are, maybe influenced by their teachers who constantly
remind them to speak more English, against overuse for they see the need to
be exposed to the target language more as the classroom is the only place
where they are exposed to it, seeing that in their homes and with friends they
use Portuguese the most or always. These also agree with Selamat (2014)
where 60% of pupils preferred minimization of their first language.

Still, following the same path, when asked whether they disliked it when their
teacher used Portuguese during lessons, 51% of them said they never or rarely
dislike it. Here again, although the majority still holds a positive view, the
percentage dropped considerably for it is 1% only which differs them from the
minority who takes the opposite view which, again, although different in
percentage, corroborates what Selamat (2014) found that a great number of
them (44.33%) did not like inclusion of other languages. This, although different
in percentage seems to reflect the statement which says they prefer only
English to be used and not Portuguese. And the reason for the discrepancy
here may be explained by looking at the 84% of them who prefer both

62
languages to be used which apparently indicates, again, that what they might
be against is overuse, as a result of what their teachers might have been telling
them it ought to be.

Different results were found by Jakobson (2010) who says that in his study,
most students believe code switching is not acceptable and English only is the
only acceptable practice, but similar in that it is sometimes a necessary means
to an end and can be used in a valuable way if not for longer periodsas a last
resort which can be equated to not overusing.

In summary, pupils tend towards an overall positive attitude towards code-

switching as it aids their learning. However, a greater part of them seem to
prefer exclusive English with certain topics and/or activities and the
minimization of their mother tongue (Portuguese) which seem to be due to their
teachers influence of monolingual practices and constant encouragement to use
more English. It also appears to be because they perceive the necessity of
being exposed to English the most since the only place they seem to use it is in
the classroom, so they want it to be minimized, but not excluded.

3.2.2. Attitudes towards code switching according to teachers

When examining teachers beliefs about code switching use in classroom, one
can come to find that teachers hold conflicting views regarding the issue in
some points (with often characterizes this phenomenon where experts and
teachers take sides on the issue at hand).

The findings suggest that teachers are unanimous in some points regarding the
use of code-switching for none of them seems to agree with English only
practices though half of them are undecided about it and most of them disagree
that the ideal teacher is a native teacher. Also, most of them (75%) believe it
can be used as a last resort when all other options are expired. However, there
are also some areas of conflicts between them.

These findings seem to certify Yataanbaba and Yildirims (2015) study which
shows that teachers in his study maintain that code-switching cannot completely
be avoided, confirming the ideas of all the teachers in this study who seem to
reject English only classrooms as the best teaching strategy. Similar to our
63
study where most teachers believed code-switching could be used as a last
resort when all other options are expired, their study found that teachers used
code-switching on purpose when the classroom conditions dictated the need of
it and taking into account the amount of thereof.

Contrary to this study Jakobson (2010) for example found that all teachers
believed code switching was not acceptable and English only was the
acceptable practice, but similar in that it is sometimes a necessary means to an
end and can be used in a valuable way if not for longer periods which can be
equated to not overusing it and/or using it as a last resort, as opined by most
teachers in the present study. In Jakobsons (2010) study it is suggested that
teachers hold a negative view of code-switching because it confuses them and
learners since they use more than two languages and it is complicated for them
to think in one language while speaking in another.

Different results were also found by Selamat (2014) who report that although
most teachers held a positive view regarding code-switching, they also tended
towards English practices.

Regarding the conflicting ideas among teachers in our study, the findings also
reveal that half (50%) of the teachers agree that code-switching should be an
integral part of the classroom whereas another half (50%) takes the opposite
views. The same happens with the idea that both languages should be strictly
separated and that code-switching will facilitate learning. These seem to
contradict the responses of these very same teachers (50%) who are against
when they stated that the more English used the better the results for the
learners, which opens a possibility for it even if limitedly, which may therefore
indicate not total rejection but cautiousness in its use. It also appears to
contradict the idea that none of them believes English is best alone (although
one of them said it can be so with some topics only to avoid overuse which may
lead to pupils overreliance and over dependency upon the teacher) as well as
the response of most of them (75%) who disagree that the ideal teacher is a
native one and of most (75%) who believe it can be used as a last resort.

64
Apparently, these discrepancies do not to fully reflect their actual beliefs but the
influence of advocators of monolingual teaching beliefs to which they might
have been exposed which sometimes tend to lead them to avoid the use of
code-switching. Notwithstanding, they sometimes find it useful due to the lack of
necessary conditions for English only teaching.

An earlier study by Magid and Mughadam (2013) who found that teachers
recognized the usefulness of code-switching if used occasionally in a judicious
way in that it expands the interaction of ESL classroom towards ESL learning
process and also helps understanding which confirms a study they refer to that
excluding L1 equates to robbing pupils of an important vehicle of learning, goes
along with the view of half of the teachers in our study who argued that the two
languages should not be separated while contrary to others who tend to believe
they should as well as that it facilitates learning where, again, teachers take
both sides. It is also similar in part to Selamat (2014)s study in that where most
teachers believed there should be a strict separation between the two
languages (being only the view of half our teachers).

As indicated by the findings in the questionnaire, no teacher reported that code

switching leads to overreliance and dependency upon the teacher, but the
interview shows that one teacher believes it may happen should it be
overusedin fact, she stated that overuse may lead to improper language use,
as they become lazy at learning a second language, that is they become over
reliant and over dependent upon the teacher. However, as suggested by the
same teacher, it can be avoided by the exclusive English in some topics and by
applying other strategies.

Salis (2014) results also differ to ours in that it was found that teachers only
had a positive attitude towards code switching. This is attributed to the fact that
teachers in his study did not have certain policies regarding the use of both
languages. More specifically, they might have not been aware of when to use
either language and of how to balance their use.

To sum it up, it can be said that teachers tend to have an overall positive
attitude towards code-switching. However they also believe that there are some

65
probable counterproductive aspects of classroom code switching, but the actual
classroom reality does not permit the complete exclusion of the students first
language. They may have also been trained to avoid the use of code-switching,
however in practice it is often a convenient tool to use. These contradictory
beliefs about code switching could impact on how it is used in the classroom.

Having ended with this discussion we now turn to the factors that govern
teachers decisions regarding code switching.

3.3. Factors that govern teachers decision regarding code-

switching in classroom
Our third research question was What factors govern teachers decision
regarding code-switching use at Escola do I Ciclo Mandume?

We have seen above that most teachers at Escola Mandume tend to believe
code-switching can be used in the classroom but only as a last resort, when the
need arises. They seem to base their use or avoidance of it based on some
factors which are the concern of this section.

As we can observe from the list given in Table 7 above, teachers were asked to
choose three which they considered as the most important, being the 1st
students abilities, 2nd classroom activities and 3rd students' levels. Comparing
with the results obtained from the interview we see that the findings here are
quite similar, as we find learners' background (which may include their levels
and abilities) and being English a foreign language they are starting to become
familiar with (also referring to their levels and abilities) plus the exclusive use of
English in some topics (activities) which in a way support Harmer (2007) who
says that it needs to make difference between levels and Macaro (2005) who
says that some activities are best conducted in the L1 while others are best
conducted in the L2. Plus others such as: pupils language (if they share the
same which is the case of participants in this study) as wells as classroom
conditions (the presence or absence of classroom facilities, wall charts. Thus
we can be lead to conclude that teachers at Escola Mandume appear to use
code-switching or to avoid it based mainly on pupils levels, types of classroom
activities and students abilities Macaro (2005) and Harmer (2007), and others
66
like classroom conditions and learners proficiency which go along with what Al-
Nofaie (2010), Sali (2014) and Yataanbaba and Yldrm (2015) have found.

3.4. Strategies that teachers should use to avoid pupils

overuse of code-switching
The fourth research question was What Strategies do teachers at Escola
Mandume use to avoid pupils overuse of code-switching?

In our attempt to answer this question, through the use of questionnaire and
interview, teachers were asked to choose from the table provided the three
most important/used strategies to combat pupils overuse of code-switching.
But, as we will see, there are more than three because these had the same
percentage on them and we have decided to include them all. The strategies
were: to repeat tasks to make them easier, encourage them to use English
appropriately, create an English environment by getting them to pretend to be
English speakers, discuss with them the value of using the L2 in class and
make L2 an unavoidable part of the task (see TABLE 8 above). In comparing
with the result from the interview, only two of these were found present, being
these, put in different words, make the L2 an unavoidable part of the task and
discuss them the value of using English (cf. 3.5.2). Other strategies were the
use of pair work, group work and flashcards. So, we conclude that some
teachers tend to avoid pupils L1 overuse by applying strategies such as repeat
tasks to make them easier, encourage them to use English appropriately, create
an English environment by getting them to pretend to be English speakers,
discuss with them the value of using the L2 in class, make L2 an unavoidable
part of the task, pair work, group work and flashcards which are part of those
suggested by Harmer (1998, pp.131-32), and Nation (2003). In order to provide
further support we suggest some more strategies (see Appendix F).

3.5. Significance of the study to the teaching/learning context

The results obtained from this study can be of great contribution to teachers,
pupils, policy makers and future researchers.
For teachers and pupils in the research context, the present study may raise
their awareness on the attitudes towards and functions of code-switching as

67
well as the factors affecting its use and how effectively it can be used in EFL
classrooms to facilitate the teaching and learning of English.

For policy makers it can raise their awareness of the pedagogical value of code-
switching as a possible teaching and learning tool and give it proper place
instead of relying on monolingual practices only.

For future researchers this study may guide them into investigating more on this
heated and controversial topic which is a very little researched topic in the area
of ELT.

Having discussed about the significance of this study to the research teaching
and learning, we are now going to come to general conclusion of this chapter.

Conclusion
This chapter sought to analyze and discuss the results encountered during our
research taking into account the four research questions we have sought to
answer. Here we will try to reach to a conclusion taking those into
consideration.

Regarding the useful applications of code-switching in classroom, unfortunately

we could not ask teachers about it. Actually it was not included in our
questionnaire; only after the research was over we realized it was needed,
however we present the useful applications presented in chapter one, being
used these: saving-time, comparison, culture, classroom management,
discussion of errors, grammar, consciousness raising.

Related to the findings regarding pupils functions of code switching we have

come to discover that pupils tend to use Portuguese in classroom most of the
times to address the teacher and interact with their peers. The main functions
gathered from the two instruments were: to explain difficult words and
sentences to communicate with peers who also speak Portuguese to ask about
grammatical rules and structures when they are unable to express themselves
in English and to provide equivalent meaning in Portuguese where difficult
words and sentences and to communicate with peers who also speak
Portuguese were the most frequent as presented in the questionnaire and to
68
communicate with peers who also speak Portuguese the most used I classroom
which was used every time and when unable to express themselves in English
(to address the teacher) used almost every time and the least used to explain
difficult words and sentences to peers the least used.

Related to teachers, they also use code-switching to some degree, however not
in every occasion, their main uses of code switching are: to mark the beginning
of class, organize classroom tasks (classroom management), to introduce
unfamiliar materials/ topics, to provide equivalent meaning (s) in L1/to translate
vocabulary (curriculum access), to give advice, to reduce students anxiety in
learning English, to give advice (to maintain interpersonal relations).

We have also looked at their attitudes towards code switching. And as regards
to this, pupils tend towards an overall positive attitude of code-switching as it
aids their learning. However, a greater part of them seem to prefer exclusive
English with certain topics and/or activities and the minimization of their mother
tongue (Portuguese) which seem to be due to their teachers influence of
monolingual practices and constant encouragement to use more English. It also
appears to be because they perceive the necessity of being exposed to English
the most since the only place they seem to use it is in the classroom, so they
want it to be minimized, but not excluded

As to teachers, they also tend to have an overall positive attitude towards code-
switching. However they also believe that there are some probable
counterproductive aspects of classroom code switching, but the actual
classroom reality does not permit the complete exclusion of the students first
language. Another reason can also be that they may have been trained to avoid
the use of code-switching, however in practice it is often a convenient tool to
use. These contradictory beliefs about code switching could impact on how it is
used in the classroom.

As to the factors taken into account for teachers decisions regarding code
switching, we have come to find out, through the questionnaire and interview we
have administered, that teachers decisions regarding code-switching are
governed by the types of activities, students background (including their levels,

69
abilities and mother tongue) and classroom conditions (e.g., the presence or
absence of classroom facilities and wall charts).

And last, but by no means the least, we have compared the strategies they use
to avoid overuse of code-switching. In this we have found that to avoid pupils
potential overuse of their L1 teachers seem to repeat tasks to make them
easier, encourage them to use English appropriately, create an English
environment by getting them to pretend to be English speakers, discuss with
them the value of using the L2 in class, make L2 an unavoidable part of the task
and pair work, group work and flashcards.

70
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This study aimed at exploring the use of code-switching at Escola do I Ciclo n
76 Mandume. The phenomenon of code switching in EFL classroom is indeed
a bone of contention among researchers, teachers and pupils. On one hand
some contend for monolingual practices, that is, the exclusive use of English
and on the other hand others vote for bilingual teaching with the inclusion of
pupils mother tongue side by side with their L2 (English). It is in the light of this
discussion that the present study was conducted having our which is supported
by the literature review (chapter 1) and the findings we have encountered
through our data collection (chapter 2) and analysis and discussion (chapter 3)
So, from our research we have come to the following conclusions:
1. Code-switching is indeed an unavoidable phenomenon in the EFL
classroom and although still controversial and divisive, and most
teachers and pupils tend to have an overall positive attitude towards it
acknowledging its pedagogical merits as a valuable tool to the teaching
and learning of English serving various functions, thus should not be
disregarded, however it should not be overuse which can be achieved
should teachers be cognizant of when and how to use it in a beneficial
way.

2. The findings of our study regarding pupils functions of code switching,

revealed by the questionnaire and their classroom practices indicate that
pupils tend to use Portuguese in classroom a lot. They use it most of the
times to address the teacher and interact with their peers for several
functions (see chap.3.2.1.) being the most frequent as presented in the
questionnaire and to communicate with peers who also speak
Portuguese the most used I classroom which was used every time and
when unable to express themselves in English (to address the teacher)
used almost every time and the least used to explain difficult words and
sentences to peers the least used.

3. Teachers appear to see a very limited role for code-switching. They

generally agree that Portuguese can be used for classroom management
(mark the beginning of class, organize classroom tasks classroom), for

71
 curriculum access (to introduce unfamiliar materials/ topics, to provide
equivalent meaning (s) in L1/to translate vocabulary) and to maintain
interpersonal relations (to give advice, to reduce students anxiety in
learning English, to give advice).

4. Pupils tend towards an overall positive attitude of code-switching as it

aids their learning. However, a greater part of them seem to prefer
exclusive English with certain topics and/or activities and the
minimization of their mother tongue (Portuguese) which seem to be due
to their teachers influence of monolingual practices and constant
encouragement to use more English. It also appears to be because they
perceive the necessity of being exposed to English the most since the
only place they seem to use it is in the classroom, so they want it to be
minimized, but not excluded.

5. Teachers tend to have an overall positive attitude towards code-

switching. However they also believe that there are some probable
counterproductive aspects of classroom code switching, but the actual
classroom reality does not permit the complete exclusion of the students
first language. They may have also been trained to avoid the use of
code-switching, however in practice it is often a convenient tool to use.
These contradictory beliefs about code switching could impact on how it
is used in the classroom.

6. Teachers make their decisions regarding code-switching based on some

factors such as the types of activities, students background (including
their levels, abilities and mother tongue) and classroom conditions (e.g.,
the presence or absence of classroom facilities and wall charts).

7. In order to avoid potential pupils overuse of code-switching teachers

seem to use strategies such as repeat tasks to make them easier,
encourage them to use English appropriately, create an English
environment by getting them to pretend to be English speakers, discuss
with them the value of using the L2 in class, make L2 an unavoidable
part of the task and pair work, group work and the use of flashcards.

72
In light of the conclusions we have come to, we recommend the following:
1. Policy makers should acknowledge the pedagogical value of pupils L1
as a possible teaching and learning tool in the L2 classroom and give it a
proper place, as an integral part of the L2 classroom, suggesting
principles to govern its use but not disallow itrelying on monolingual
practices only.

2. Since pupils tended to use Portuguese a lot, all most every time,
teachers should devise ways to regulate it so that it does not take control
over the target language by making them aware of when it is appropriate
to code-switch and when to keep in the target language (for this, see
suggestions in Appendix F).

3. There seems to be no need for suggestions regarding the roles of code-

switching for they appear to already be aware of the functions it serve,
however, they should deepen their knowledge on that through seminars
and workshops.

4. Because pupils seem to have the need to be exposed to more English

and the only place where they are exposed to it is in the classroom which
may not be enough to make them proficient learners, the school
administration could create some extra-curricular activities like English
weekend, from time to time, to give them opportunity to be exposed to
more English and put in practice what they have been learning.

5. Findings regarding teachers differing views in some points could a

motivation for workshops and seminars to be organized by teachers to
examine and evaluate their own code switching practices so that they
can have a better understanding of the nature of code switching in
foreign language learning and teaching. And rather than seeking to avoid
code-switching or letting it be overused, teachers should take
advantages of the available strategies to help them avoid pupils overuse
of code-switch and promote more English use (see appendix F) while
taking advantage of the benefits of L1, using appropriate activities

73
 involving the use of it to facilitate pupils learning (see more in Appendix
G and H).

6. Suggestions of the factors governing teachers decisions regarding code-

switching may not be relevant, at least for the context of this study for
teachers seem to already be aware of that.

The present study provided a framework for the use of code-switching in foreign
language classrooms though it represents only a fraction of what there is to
know and say about the phenomenon of code-switching which still remains an
area in need of research, especially in the Angolan context. Therefore, the
paragraph below reflects what I feel are area in need of research.

It was seen that although teachers use code-switching to some degree, they
seem to have some reservations regarding its use which seem to contradict
some of their stated beliefs and classroom practices, to which one of the
reasons we have given is that they might have been trained to avoid code-
switching. As it is simply our speculation, future studies could try to examine
whether teachers have received any training regarding the use of code-
switching.

Another area which also needs further research is on pupils attitudes towards
code-switching. It was seen that some of them preferred English only use with
some topics and/or activities. So, future research should be conducted to
investigate which are the activities they prefer to be conducted using English
only and which ones they prefer to be conducted using both Portuguese and
English (code-switching).

74
APPENDICES
 APPENDICES

Instituto Superior de Cincias de Educao

ISCED-HUILA
Departamento de Letras Modernas
SECO DE INGLS
APPENDIX A. Questionrio para os alunos
Caro estudante,
O propsito deste trabalho identificar quais so as funes da lngua Portuguesa nas salas de
aulas e investigar quais as atitudes dos alunos para com esta prtica. Com este questionrio eu
gostaria de ter o seu comentrio baseado na sua experincia na sala de aula como estudante a
respeito do assunto em questo. Garantimos que o possvel ser feito para manter todos os
dados que voc der com o mximo cuidado e segredo.
Seu caro
Domingos Capita Gavino Sachissoquele
A. Informao Preliminar
1. Idade. Por favor ponha um crculo
a) 12-14 b. 15-17
2. Sexo. Por favor ponha um crculo
a) Masculino b. Feminino
3. Qual a tua lngua materna?
__________________________

4. Qual a lngua que voc mais usa em casa?

___________________________________

B. Funes da mudana de cdigo (uso alternado do Ingls e Portugus)

1. Voc concorda que os alunos devem usar o Portugus nestas ocasies? (ponha um )
Funes do Uso do Portugus SIM NO NO
SEI
1. Quando no consigo me expressar em Ingls
2. Para me ajudar a manter a conversa
3. Para me comunicar com os meus colegas que tambm
falam Portugus
3. Para explicar palavras e frases difceis para os meus
colegas
4. Para dar o significado do Ingls para o Portugus
5. Para perguntar o (s) significado (s) do Portugus para o
Ingls
6. Para perguntar acerca de regras e estruturas gramaticais

7. Outras (especifique) ________________

75
 C. Atitudes para coma mudana de cdigos (o uso alternado do Ingls e Portugus)
Instrues: Ponha um asterisco (*) na resposta que melhor descreve a tua POSICO e aos
teus SENTIMENTOS acerca do uso do Portugus pelo teu professor nas salas de aula de
Lngua Inglesa. Sendo: 1= Nunca 2= Quase Nunca 3= As vezes 4= Na maioria das vezes 5=
Sempre

Atitudes 1 2 3 4 5
1. O uso do Portugus pelo meu professor ajuda-me a apreciar
a aula
2. O uso do Portugus pelo meu professor ajuda-me a
entender melhor a aula
3. O uso do Portugus pelo meu professor faz-me sentir mais
confiante e motivado a aprender o Ingls
4. O uso do portugus pelo meu professor encoraja-me a
participar activamente nas actividades da sala de aula
5. Eu preferia que o professor usasse s Ingls durante as
aulas e no Portugus
6. Eu preferia que o professor diminusse o uso do Portugus
durante as aulas
7. Eu preferia que o professor usasse Ingls e Portugus
durante as aulas
8. Eu no gosto quando o professor usa portugus durante as
aulas de Ingls
9. Fica-me difcil aprender quando o professor no explica
palavras novas, tpicos e conceitos novos em Portugus
10. Fica-me difcil concentrar durante as aulas de Ingls quando
o professor usa s Ingls
11. Outra (especifique por favor) ___________

Obrigado pela Cooperao!!!

76
 INSTITUTO SUPERIOR DE CINCIAS DE EDUCAO
ISCED-HULA
DEPARTAMENTO DE LETRAS MODERNAS
SECO DE INGLS

APPENDIX B. Pupil questionnaire (english version)

Dear pupils
The aim of this questionnaire is to explore the functions of code-switching according to teachers,
examine their attitudes towards its use. You simply need to fill in this questionnaire based on your
own opinion and learning experience. The results will be used for the completion of my
Licenciatura Degree in Lingustica Ingls at ISCED-HUILA. You can rest assured that data you
provide will strictly be kept secret.
Yours Sincerely
DOMINGOS CAPITA GAVINO SACHISSOQUELE
A. Background information
1. Age. Idade. Please circle
a) 12-14 b. 15-17
2. Sex. Please circle
a) Male b. Female
3. What is your mother tongue?
__________________________

4. Which language do you use the most in your home?

______________________________

B. Fuctions of code-switching
1. Do you agree that pupils can use Portuguese in these occasions? Please tick
YES NO DO
Occasions NOT
KNOW
1. I use Portuguese when I am unable to express myself in
English
2. I use Portuguese to help me maintain the flow of
conversation
3. I use Portuguese to communicate with my peers who
share who speak also Portuguese
4. I use Portuguese to explain difficult words and sentences
to my peers
5. I use to provide equivalent meaning(s) in Portuguese
6. I use Portuguese to ask equivalent meaning(s) in English
7. Other please specify___________________

77
 C. Attitudes towards code Switching
Instructions: Tick the answer that most accurately describes your beliefs about Portuguese
and English usage in the language classroom, being 1 = Never 2 = Rarely 3 = sometimes 4=
Often 5= Always

Items 1 2 3 4 5

1. The use of Portuguese by the teacher helps me to enjoy the

lesson
2. The use of Portuguese by the teacher students understand the
helps lesson better
3. The use of Portuguese by the teacher makes me feel more
confident and motivated in learning English
4. The use of Portuguese use by the teacher encourages me to
actively participate in classroom activities
5. I prefer the teacher to use English only during lessons and not
to use Portuguese
6. I prefer the teacher to minimize the use of my first language
during lessons
7. I prefer the teacher to use both English and Portuguese during
lessons
8. Pupils dislike it when the teacher uses Portuguese during
English lessons
9. I find it difficult to learn when the teacher does not explain new
words/topics/concepts in Portuguese
10. I have a difficulty to concentrate during English lessons when
the teacher uses English only

Thanks for your cooperation!!!!!!!!

78
 INSTITUTO SUPERIOR DE CINCIAS DE EDUCAO
ISCED-HULA
DEPARTAMENTO DE LETRAS MODERNAS
SECO DE INGLS

APPENDIX C. Teacher questionnaire

Dear teachers
The aim of this questionnaire is to explore the functions of code-switching according to teachers,
examine their attitudes towards, identify, the factors that govern their decisions regarding code-
switching and the strategies they use to avoid pupils overuse of it. You simply need to fill in this
questionnaire based on your own opinion and learning experience. The results will be used for the
completion of my Licenciatura Degree in Lingustica Ingls at ISCED-HUILA. You can rest
assured that data you provide will strictly be kept secret.
Yours Sincerely
DOMINGOS CAPITA GAVINO SACHISSOQUELE
A. Background information
1. Sex. Please circle
a) Male b. Female
2. What is your mother tongue?
____________________________________

3. What is your educational qualification?

____________________________________

4. How long have you been teaching English? (please circle)

1. 1-4 years 2. 5-9 years 3. 10-14 years 4. 15-19 years 5. More than 20 years
5. Where have you been trained to teach English? (Please choose one)
1. ISCED
2. EFP
3. Both
4. None
B. Functions of code-switching
1. Do you agree that teachers should use Portuguese in these occasions?(Please tick)
Occasions YES NO I DONT
KNOW
a) To mark the beginning of class
b) To get the learners attention
c) To check for comprehension
d) To organize classroom tasks
e) To introduce unfamiliar materials/ topics
f) To maintain classroom discipline
g) To provide praise/feedback/personal remarks
about students performance
h) To encourage students participation in
classroom activities
i) To reduce students anxiety in learning English
j) To increase students motivation and confidence
in learning English
k) To provide equivalent meaning (s) in L1 to
translate vocabulary
79
Continuation

C. Functions of code-switching
1. Do you agree that teachers should use Portuguese in these occasions?(Please tick)
Occasions YES NO DO NOT
KNOW
l) To give advice
m) To elicit vocabulary and grammatical
structures
n) To call the learners attention to the correct
pronunciation for sounds in English
o) To bring about humorous effects

p) Other (please specify)_________________

D. Attitudes towards code-switching

Instruction: Tick the answer that most accurately describes your beliefs about Portuguese and
English usage in the language classroom

1. I believe that Code switching will facilitate the language learning process
1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Dont know
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree
2. I believe that the practice of code switching will increase the students reliance and
dependency on the teacher.
1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Dont Know
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree
3. I believe that code switching should be included as an integral part of the ESL lesson
1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Dont Know
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree
4. I believe that there should be a strict separation of the mother tongue and English in the
EFL classroom
1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Dont Know
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree
5. I believe that code switching should only be used as a last resort when all other options
have been exhausted
1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Dont Know
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree
6. I believe that code switching is an efficient, time-saving technique.
1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Dont Know
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree
80
7. I believe that English is best taught in English-only classrooms
1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Dont Know
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree
8. The ideal teacher of English is a native speaker
1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Dont Know
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree
9. I believe that the more English is used, the better the results for the learners
1. Strongly Disagree
2. Disagree
3. Dont Know
4. Agree
5. Strongly Agree
10. Mark the three most important factors that you consider should govern the teachers
decision regarding code switching and rank them. Being 1. The most important; 2.
The second most important; 3. The third most important
______ Students levels
_____Students abilities
_____L1 and L2 differences
_____Teaching methods
_____Lesson content
_____Learners behavior
_____Learners attitudes towards L1 or L2
_____Learners proficiency
_____Types of classroom activities
_____Other (Please specify)
11. Choose the three most important strategies you feel teachers should use to avoid
students L1 overuse. (please tick)
Strategies
1. Talk to them about the issue
2. Encourage them to use English appropriately
3. Only respond to English use
4. Create an English environment by getting them to pretend to be English
speakers
5. Discuss with them the value of using the L2 in class
6. Make L2 an unavoidable part of the task
7. Discuss with them the value of using the L2 in class
8. Suggest solutions to encourage L2 use and present reasons why they should
avoid using the L2
9. Set up a monitoring system to remind learners to use the L2
10. Choose manageable tasks that are within their proficiency
11. Pre-teach the language items and skills needed
12. Repeat tasks to make them easier
13. Inform them of the learning goals of each task and use non-threatening tasks.
14. Other (please specify) _________________________________
Adapted from the strategies provided by Harmer (1998) and Nation (2003)

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION!!

Lubango May 2017

81
 APPENDIX D. Semi-structured interview questions
1. Based on your personal experience, do you think code switching is the best solution to
address the students language learning
difficulties?________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
2. Most ELT practitioners, education experts and policy makers are strong advocates of the
exclusive use of English during the teaching and learning process (code switching is a
practice which is discouraged or even prohibited/proscribed). What are your thoughts on
this belief?
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
3. Many language experts have expressed concerns about using code switching in the ESL
classroom as it is believed to result in improper language use amongst students. What are
your thoughts on this belief?
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
4. Do you think that code switching will result in the overuse and overdependence on the
students native language?
_________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
5. What are the factors which you consider when using code switching during English
lessons?
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
6. Do you use code switching spontaneously and naturally when youre teaching or do you
come up with a plan on when code switching will be used throughout the lesson?
_________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
7. Do you encourage your students to use English during lessons? How do you do so?
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
________________
8. What are the advantages or disadvantages of using code switching in the ESL
classroom?________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
Adapted from Selamat (2014).

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION!!

Lubango May 2017

82
APPENDIX E. Classroom observation chart on the use of code-switching
in classroom
School:_____________________________________________________

Grade: _____ Subject: __________Period/Time: _____

Teacher: ________________________________Date:_____/_____/_____

Observer:____________________________________________________

Teacher language Pupil language

use (L1 or L2) use (L1 or L2)
To mark the beginning of the class
To get learners attention
To check for comprehension
To Organize classroom tasks
To introduce information/materials/topics
To Maintain classroom discipline
To Provide praise/feedback/personal remarks about
behavior/performance
To Encourage participation in classroom activities
To Reduce anxiety
To Increase pupils motivation to learn English
To bring humorous effect
To give advice
To Ask the meaning of the new vocabulary
To Present the meaning of new vocabulary
To Provide equivalent meaning in L1
To Explain grammatical rules
To Ask about grammatical rules
To Explain difficult words to peers
When unable to express themselves
To Translate words or sentences in L1
To give instructions
To keep the conversation going
To Call learners attention to pronunciation
To Clarify understanding

Adabted from Greggio and Gil (2007)

Lubango, May 2017

83
 APPENDIX F. Strategies teachers should use to avoid pupils overuse of
code-switching
Acknowledge the L1: It is widely accepted that the use of L1 in L2 learning is important and
should not be avoided.
Use appropriate L1, L2 activities: Through using L1 grammar and vocabulary activities can
be effectively done in the classroom.
Differentiate between levels: As they work more in L2, their need for L1 will get less, but they
may still need translation which is considered as the fifth skill.
Agree clear guidelines: Students need to know when the use of L1 is beneficial
Use encouragement and persuasion: Students may need encouragement to speak in L2.

From Harmer (2001, p.35)

84
 APPENDIX G. Useful applications of code-switching in classroom
COMPARISON
1. Vocabulary
Exploring the nuances of vocabulary items in both languages
Building bilingual (or even multilingual) semantic maps
2. Grammar
highlight the differences between the two languages ( to avoid negative
transfer)
show similarities (which will undoubtedly boost the internalization of L2
grammar)
GRAMMAR
Check understanding of grammar points at the end of the lesson
Present rules that govern grammar
Compare L1 and L2 grammar (eg., possessive case; plurals)
Facilitate understanding of grammar rules (comparing L1 with L2)

VOCABULARY:
To present new vocabulary
To translate words (which would take several minutes to explain in the TL)
To provide equivalent in the L1
To define new vocabulary items
To ask equivalents (what does X mean in Portuguese? /How do you say X in English?
To elicit language (how do you say x in English?
To explain difficult concepts (abstract concepts)

CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT
Organize classroom tasks
Maintain classroom discipline and the structure of the lesson
Regulate pupils behavior
Marking the beginning of class
Opening the class
Negotiating directions
Requesting help
Managing discipline
Teacher encouragement
Teacher compliments
Teachers command
Teacher admonitions
Mitigation

Compiled from Atkinson (1987) Schweers (1999) Harmer (2009, in Silvani 2014) Voicu (2012),
Ferguson (2003 in Selamat 2014).

85
 APPENDIX H. Example of a lesson plancode-switching interaction
Teachers name: Domingos Topic: Plural of nouns (regular)
C.G.Sachissoquele Date: Monday 2nd October, 2017
Group profile: 8th grade pupils Length: 45 minutes
School: Mandume Period: Morning
Pupils level: beginners Number of pupils: 35
Pupils age: 12 to 14

Learning objectives New vocabulary: fox, baby, toy, church, dish,

At the end of the lesson pupils will be able to shop, school, miss, hotel, stadium, boy, country,
create plural nouns and use them in market, pencils,
sentences. New structure: noun+ (e)s/ies
Materials: flashcards, chalk, board, word cards
Teachers aim: To encourage students to
the use of the target language as much as
possible without disregarding their mother
tongue

Use of code-switching: Code-switching will

be used:
-by the teacher
to illustrate the differences and similarities
between L1 and L2 grammar (plurals)
-By pupils to show their understanding of
English grammar rules
Stage Time Tasks(Teacher) Tasks(Pupils) Interaction Purpose/aim

Warm up 3-5 Explain that Today To introduce

And review we are learning the new topic
of previous about plural nouns. Listen and do T-P/P-P to PP and
knowledge As you might what asked make them
remember, a noun aware of what
is a person, place, they are going
or thing. Lets to talk about
review quickly. Turn
to your partner and
give them a list of 5
nouns.

Say, Now, we will

learn about plural
nouns, which are
people, places, or
things in amounts
greater than one.
10 Share with the
students that, Most To elicit the
of the time you just grammar rule
have to add an s to Listen and T-C/C-T form pupils
a noun in order to answer
Presentation make it plural. For
example, I found my
book. What if I
found more than
one book? What
would my sentence
be then? T -C To reinforce
Listen the grammar
Share another rule
86
example: I like
shopping at the
market. What if I go T-C
to more than one Listen To introduce
market? How does another rule
my sentence
change? T-C
Listen and
The rule here is that observe -To check
you add s to the understanding
end of the noun to of the grammar
make it plural (as in T.C/T-P rule
Portuguese)
Listen, observe
However, this rule and answer
doesnt work with T-T/T-C
every noun. When
nouns end in ch, sh,
s, x, z, and o, you To introduce
add es. (If another rule
explaining this in
English be too
difficult for them and
thus, time-
consuming, try to
switch to
Portuguese)

Give one example:

the fox ran into a
hole. And ask: what
if there was more
than one fox? How
would the sentence
change?

Write 2 more
examples on the
board with nouns
ending in ch, sh, s,
x, or z and have
students explain
how the sentence
would change with
more than one
noun.

Say, The last rule

we will learn today
is for a noun that
ends in 'y.' For
example, The baby
cries a lot. What if
there was more
than one baby?
Give one more
similar example. (If
explaining this in
English be too
difficult for them and
87
 thus, time-
consuming, try to
switch to
Portuguese)
Controlled 7-10 Have the word P-P Practice to
Practice cards posted Pair work provide Ss
randomly around with
the room. Have opportunity to
each student share the new
number a blank language in a
sheet of paper from controlled way
1-10.Have them find and correct
each noun, write it possible
down, and make it mistakes.
into a plural noun.
Pupils will have to
work with a partner
Freer 3-5 Write the words Practice P-P Make Ss
Practice "pencil," "church practice new
and "baby" on the language
board. Students freely using
must turn these their creativity
three singular nouns
into plural nouns
and use each one in
a sentence and tell
which rules they
have applied
Feedback 3-5 Review students' Go in front and To see what
work to assess if read their P-C-T they practiced
they can form plural sentences in pairs and
nouns using the organize
rules they just possible
learned. problems.
Review and Ask your students, T-C/P-T To check
Closing 3-5 "Why is it important Listen and understanding
to learn how to form answer of grammar
plural nouns? What points related
are the three to the
different rules for language
creating a plural learnt
noun?" (allow code-
switching for them
to explain these
rules)
Homework 3-5 Ask students to Listen T-C To make them
come with two more be in touch
words for each rule with what they
they have learnt for learned in
next lesson classroom at
home and
further
practice.
ANTICPATED PROBLEMS ANTICIPATED SOLUTIONS

1. Pupils might be unable or anxious to Allow code-witching to make them comfortable

speak in the target language when and stress-free
asked to review what they have
learnt; Explicitly, show the difference (use code-
2. Pupils might apply the same rule, for switching if need be)
88
 example to the words baby and
boy

BOARDWORK

Singular Plural

Market Markets
Boy Boys
Toy Toys
Baby Babies
Pencil Pencils
Miss Misses
Hotel Hotels
School Schools

Adapted from: Wakabi (2015)

89
REFERENCES
 REFERENCES
Ahmad, B, H., & Jusoff, K. (2009). Teachers code switching in classroom
instructions for low English proficient learners. ELT journal, 2(2).
Retrieved from www.academia.edu/23440394_English_Language-
_Teachers_Code_switching

Alavi, T, M. (2008). Teachers' beliefs and practices about the use of the L1.
Retrieved 20 December, 2016 from
https://www.academia.edu/2473394/1_Teachers_Beliefs-
_and_Practices_about_the_Use_of_the_L1

Al-Nofaie, H. (2010). Attitudes of Teachers and Students towards Using Arabic

in EFL Classrooms in Saudi Public Schools- A Case Study. Research on
Youth and Language, 4(1), pp. 64-95. Retrieved 20, December, 2016
from http://www.acarindex.com/dosyalar/makale/acarindex-
1423909850.pdf

Atkinson, D. (1987).The mother tongue in the classroom: a neglected source?

ELT Journal, 41(4) Retrieved 25, August 2015, from
www.teachenglishworldwide.com/Articles/Ferrer

Auerbach, E. R. (1993). Reexamining English only in the ESL classroom.

TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), 9-32.

Blackman, N. (2013/2014). EFL teachers perceptions on the Use of L1 in a

primary and secondary classroom in Belarus. University of Edinburgh.
Retrieved November, 2015, from Retrieved November, 2015, from
https://englishagenda.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/filefield_paths/ef
l_teachers_perceptions

Brown, H.D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An Interactive Approach to

Language Pedagogy. White Plains, NY: Pearson/Longman.

Cacumba, J. S. C. (2014). Determining the Academic Needs of Teacher

Trainees of English at ISCED-Huila, Angola. Retrieved from
http://uir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/13784

Cohen, L., Manion, L & Marrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th
ed). London: Routledge

Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. The Canadian
Modern Language Review, 57(3), pp. 402-424.

Costa, E. (2010). Lubango-mais alunos na escola Mandume. Jornal de Angola.

Retrieved 25 July 2016 from
http://www.angolabelazebelo.com/2010/07/lubango-mais-alunos-na-
escola-mandume/

Drnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

90
Elundula, F.Y.Y. (2014). The use of L1 in an ESP classroom to enhance
students learning achievement at Engineering Courses from ISPH.
Licenciantura Monograph, presented at ISCED-Hula

Ferreira, L. P. (2004). Using Portuguese to help grade 8 pupils learn English: a

proposal of a unit for the ELT methodology programme at
ISCED/Lubango. Licenciantura Monograph, presented at ISCED-Hula.

Gardner-Chloros, P. (2009). Code-switching. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Greggio, S., & Gil, G. (2007). Teachers and learners use of code-switching in
the English as a foreign language classroom: a qualitative study.
Linguagem & Ensino, 10(2), pp. 371393. Retrieved 25, August 2015,
from.
http://www.educadores.diaadia.pr.gov.br/arquivos/File/2010/artigos_tese
s/Ingles/greggio.pdf

Gulzar, M. A. (2010). Code-switching: Awareness about its utility in bilingual

classrooms. Bulletin of Education and Research, 32(2), pp. 2344.
Retrieved 5, November, 2015 from http://pu.edu.pk/ /PDF/2-
Malik%20Ajmal%20%20Gulzar.pd

Harmer, J. (1998). How to Teach English: An Introduction to the Practice of

English Language Teaching (1st Ed.). Longman.

Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English language teaching. (3rd Ed.). Harlow.
Essex: Pearson Longman.

Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English language teaching. (4th Ed.). Harlow.
Essex: Pearson Longman.

INIDE (Instituto Nacional de investigao e desenvolvimento da educao).

2013. Programa de Ingls (7, 8 e 9 classes). Editora Moderna, S.A

Jakobson, C., & Rydn, H. (2012). A study of code-switching in four Swedish

EFL classrooms Retrieved, 15 August 2015 from
https://dspace.mah.se bitstream handle Ast

Jingxia, L. (2010). Teachers code-switching to the L1 in EFL classroom. The

Open Applied Linguistics Journal, (3), 1023. Retrieved 15, August, 2015
from http://benthamopen.com/toalj/articles/V003/10TOALJ.pdf.

Kamhuber, P. (2010). Comparison of grammar in Austrian and Spanish English

Language Teaching in Textbooks

Kayaolu, M. N. (2012). The use of mother tongue in foreign language teaching

from teachers practice and perspective. Pamukkale niversitesi Eitim
Fakltesi Dergisi, Say, 32, pp. 2535. Retrieved 19, August, 2015 from
https://pauegitimdergi.pau.edu.tr DergiPdfDetay.aspx? ID-

91
Kim, y & Petraki, E. (2009). Students and teachers attitudes to L1 in EFL
classrooms. The Asian EFL journal quarterly, 7(2), pp. 5889. Retrieved
from www.asian-efl-journal.comDecember --

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language

teaching/Diane Larsen Freeman. (2nd Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.

Liu, D., Ahn, G. S., Baek, K. S., & Han, N. O. (2004). South Korean high school
English teachers' code switching: Questions and challenges in the drive
for maximal use of English in teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 38/4, pp. 605-
638.

Llamas, C., Mullany, L., & Stockwell, P. (2007).The Routledge companion to

sociolinguistics.USA and Canada: Routledge.

Macaro, E. (2005). Code-switching in the L2 classroom: a communication and

learning strategy. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers:
perceptions, challenges, and contributions to the professions, 63-84.
United States of America: Springer.

Mackey, A. and S.M. Gass. (2005). second language research: Methodology

and Design. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Magid, M.E. M. A & A.H. Mugaddam 2013. Code switching as an interactive tool
in ESL classrooms. English Linguistics Research, 2(2). Retrieved August,
2015 from www.sciedu.ca Abdel Magid

Nation, P. (2003). The role of the first language in foreign language learning.
Asian EFL Journal, 5(2), 1-8.

Nordin, N. M., Ali, F. D. R., Zubir, S. I. S. S., & Sadjirin, R. (2013). ESL learners
reactions towards code switching in classroom settings. Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences. (90), 478487. Retrieved 19, August, 2015
from www.sciencedirect.com/ /pii/S1877042813020053-

Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

Nunan, D. (2015).Teaching English to speakers of other languages: An

Introduction. Routledge

Ortega, L. (2009). Understanding second language acquisition: Routledge

Parry, J. (2011). The L1 in the L2 classroom. Retrieved from

www.theeltexchange.com/jason/

92
Poplack, S. (1980). Sometimes I will start a sentence in Spanish y
termino en espanol: toward a typology of code switching. Linguistics,
18, 581-618.

Richards, C.J., & Rogers, T.S. (1986). Approaches and methods in language
teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Richards, J.C., & Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman dictionary of language teaching

and applied linguistics (4th Edition).Harlow, Essex: Longman

Sali, P. (2014). An analysis of the teachers use of L1 in Turkish EFL

classrooms. System, 42(1), pp. 308-318. Retrieved 20, December, 2016
from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.021

Saville-Troike, M. (2006).Introducing second language acquisition Cambridge:

Cambridge university press

Schweers, W.C.Jr. (1999). Using the L1 in the L2 classroom. English Teaching

Forum, 37(2).

Selamat, J.T. (2014). Code switching in the Malaysian ESL Classroom.

Retrieved 5, November, 2015 http://ourarchive.otago.ac.nz/
/SelamatJoannaT201

Seliger, H.W., & E. Shohamy. (1989). Second language research methods.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Silvani, D. (2014). The use of first language in English classroom. Retrieved 20

September, 2017 from www.academia.edu

Stryker, S.B., & Leaver, B. L. (1997). Content-based Instruction in Foreign

Language Education: Models and Methods. Georgetown University
Press.

Svendsen, E. (2014). The influences of Code-switching in the Second

Language Classroom in connection to language development. Retrieved
5, November, 2015 from https://dspace.mah.se SvendsenEmelie.

Turnbull, M., & O`Cain, J.D.(Ed.). (2009). First language use in Second and
Foreign Language Learning. Myles Turnbull & Jennifer Daily-O Cain

Undangala, J. da C. (2014). Teachers codeswitching in grade 10 EFL

classrooms at Escola secundria do Nambambi in Lubango.
Licenciantura Monograph, presented at ISCED-Hula

stnel, E. (2016). EFL classroom code-switching. London, Palgarve,

Maximilan.

Voicu, C.G. (2012) Overusing mother tongue in English language teaching.

International Journal of Communication Research 2(3), pp. 212-218.
Retrieved from www.ijcr.eu articole

93
Wakabi, E. (2015). Plural noun practice. Retrieved 2, October 2017 from
https://www.education.com

Xiaoil, C. (2013). Research on Chinese colleague English teachers classroom

code-switching: beliefs and attitudes. Journal of Language Teaching and
Research, 4(1), pp. 271284.Retrieved 5, November, 2015 from
http://www.academypublication.com/issues/past/jltr/vol04/06/17.pdf

Yataanbaba, E., & Yldrm, R. (2015). EFL teachers' code switching in

Turkish secondary EFL young language learner classrooms.
International Journal of Linguistics 7(1), Retrieved 5 November from
www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/

94
DECLARATION
 DECLARAO
Eu, Domingos Capita Gavino Sachissoquele, estudante finalista do Instituto
Superior de Cincias da Educao da Hula (ISCED-Hula) do curso de
LINGUSTICA/INGLS, do Departamento de Letras modernas.

Declaro por minha honra ter elaborado este trabalho, s, e somente com o
auxlio da bibliografia que tive acesso e dos meus conhecimentos adquiridos
durante uma longa e difcil carreira estudantil e profissional

Lubango ao 9 de Outubro de 2017

O declarante
___________________________________________
Domingos Capita Gavino Sachissoquele

95